Register here

Author Topic: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic  (Read 381084 times)

Online SpudmanWP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 949
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1545 on: January 14, 2019, 07:53:44 am »
Two stealth jets to arrive in Korea by March

Quote
By Park Ji-won

Two F-35A stealth fighter aircraft will be delivered to South Korea from the U.S. by the end of March, a military source said Sunday.

"Two F-35As out of 10, which the Air Force will receive this year, will arrive in South Korea by the end of March. They will be deployed by around April or May," a source familiar with the matter said.

The source said two aircraft will arrive every month and up to 10 stealth fighters will be handed over by the end of the year. The Air Force will possibly complete their deployment during the same time. By the end of 2018, the Air Force had taken over six F-35As for training at Arizona's Luke Air Force Base in the U.S.
More at the JUMP
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=261946
WE4-45-1-08     OMHIWDMB
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Offline Jeb

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 241
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1546 on: January 14, 2019, 11:31:49 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.

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

Well, let's not go overboard. That F-35 isn't flying an airshow routine on a full fuel load any more than an F-16 is going to fly one with dual externals.

Offline TomcatViP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Hellcat
« Last Edit: January 15, 2019, 06:30:31 am by TomcatViP »

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2131
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1548 on: January 15, 2019, 02:35:01 pm »
"Death-defying moves"? What part of the 1920s is that headline-writer trapped in?

Offline TomcatViP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Hellcat
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1549 on: January 16, 2019, 03:20:17 am »
deleted

Offline Dragon029

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 618
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1550 on: January 18, 2019, 04:35:43 am »
Singapore (which has been a JSF Security Cooperative Partner since 2003) has finally confirmed / announced plans to purchase F-35s. However, they'll only initially be purchasing a small quantity from which they intend to perform a presumed 9-12 month long evaluation of the jet before deciding on how big a fleet they should procure:

https://twitter.com/Ng_Eng_Hen/status/1086160101482815488
Quote
Our F-16s will have to retire soon after 2030. Happy to report that DSTA and @TheRSAF have completed their technical evaluation, and decided that the F-35 would be the most suitable replacement fighter. We will procure a few planes first, before deciding on a full fleet.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-f-35-fighter-jet-replace-f-16-rsaf-lockheed-11139654

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2555
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1551 on: January 18, 2019, 09:14:08 am »
It has long been speculated that Singapore would buy F-35s.  It is also speculated likely to be F-35Bs.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11153
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1552 on: January 18, 2019, 10:00:12 am »
It has long been speculated that Singapore would buy F-35s.  It is also speculated likely to be F-35Bs.

I'm wondering if South Korea will do a Japan and put F-35Bs on flat tops.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline kaiserd

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 513
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1553 on: January 18, 2019, 12:39:34 pm »
It has long been speculated that Singapore would buy F-35s.  It is also speculated likely to be F-35Bs.

I'm wondering if South Korea will do a Japan and put F-35Bs on flat tops.

The equivalent Japanese ships are substantially larger with room for larger air wings and support.
While it’s very likely the Korean ships could carry and operate the F-35B that would have to be very small numbers and potentially could limit their helicopter complement to the point of having not enough of either.
Especially when taking into account everything that has to be brought along to sustain operations.

However a relatively token F-35B deployment aboard what historicaly would have been considered light carriers may become a new fashion for countries in the region with regional power aspirations.

The likes of India could (and have) done worse.

And it had been my understanding that Singapore’s interest in the F-35B was more related to concepts of dispersed deployment of them away from their small in number major airbases due to concerns related to their almost complete lack of strategic depth and potential vulnerability to first strikes.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2019, 12:48:52 pm by kaiserd »

Offline kcran567

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 655
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1554 on: January 18, 2019, 01:10:41 pm »
"Death-defying moves"? What part of the 1920s is that headline-writer trapped in?



This video  taken at Luke AFB in Arizona,
Yes has a "cheesy" title as Death-Defying but I'm very impressed by the
Post Stall maneuver ability of the F-35 in this video
with out the (supposed) benefit of thrust vectoring.

F-35 can do some impressive and controlled low speed post stall maneuvering.

In the video the pilot does a fairly fast climb, followed by a tight little loop, slows down airspeed in the loop, performs a falling leaf
maneuver while doing a Right rudder turn while keeping the nose pointed high...all while full controllability.


Very impressive. I thought the F-35 would have the maneuverability of and F-105, I was wrong.

« Last Edit: January 18, 2019, 01:13:58 pm by kcran567 »

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2131
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1555 on: January 18, 2019, 04:48:11 pm »
I thought the F-35 would have the maneuverability of and F-105, I was wrong.

There was never any reason to believe that. On the other hand, if you actually read the original 2015 report and the common-sense accounts of it, what you're seeing on the video is consistent with the report.


Offline Dragon029

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 618
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1556 on: January 18, 2019, 07:06:06 pm »
I've encountered quite a few people who thought similarly about the F-35's performance becoming comparable to that of a 3rd gen fighter or whatever; you have to remember that there's been dissenting opinions in the media like Pierre Sprey claiming that it wouldn't be able to out-manoeuvre a MiG-21 during his appearances on Canadian TV & international branches of Russia Today, or the whole "can't turn, can't climb, can't run", "clubbed like baby seals", "doubly inferior", etc statements that came from the Pacific Vision 'study' and have been echoed  over the years by dozens of news outlets. There was also the "dogfight report" interpretation from War Is Boring that has some people today thinking that the F-35 is actually inferior to the F-16 in overall air-to-air combat.

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2131
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1557 on: January 19, 2019, 06:51:05 am »
Here is the report itself:

http://aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/uploads/2015/06/F-35%20High%20AoA%20Maneuvers.pdf

There was a lot of overheated rhetoric on both sides, but the very short summary of the report is that while the F-35 exhibited good low-speed controllability, it was inferior in energy maneuverability (basically, thrust and lift versus weight and drag) to the F-16 - which was not the best F-16 you could find, being a two-seat Block 40, heavier than a 30 and less powerful than a 50. One observation was that the EM deficiency made it harder to exploit the low-speed, high-alpha advantages because once the jet was in a low-energy state it took too long to get out of it: Verbatim:

So, in general, the high AoA capabilities of the jet could not be used in an effective way without significantly reducing follow-on maneuvering potential.

This is visible in the most recent display video. The low-speed turns are impressive, but are followed by a long gallop the length of the airfield in which energy can be regained. The vertical climb maneuver is topped with a low-speed, high-alpha maneuver and what looks like a partial gunship turn, but at the same time the jet starts a long descent before entering the next maneuver.

The S/W can be tweaked to improve some aspects of low-speed performance, but EM is one of those pesky I-canna-alter-the-laws-of-physics issues. And it's not that the F-35 flies like a third-generation fighter (whatever that is) but that aircraft design is full of trades and compromises.


Offline Dragon029

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 618
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1558 on: January 19, 2019, 07:49:40 am »
I have no disputes with the report itself (that would be dumb), but I did take issue with the common interpretation that was made of it - that it was some sort of IOT&E-style final operational evaluation of the F-35's dogfighting capability rather than just a single developmental test that was searching for issues with high AoA control laws (as the first sentence of the report states).

The F-35 certainly isn't pushing the limits of modern fighter capability when it comes to T:W or sustained turn performance, but the report makes multiple references to control law issues inhibiting performance, such as:
Quote
During a tree, the anti-spin logic engaged as a direct result of this unpredictability. The F-35 had gained a 3/9 advantage and the pilot desired to maneuver behind the bandit. A full rudder input had no result initially but after a few seconds the jet began to maneuver simultaneously to the command being abandoned and replaced with stick input. Once the delayed result appeared from the initial rudder input, the rudder was promptly re-input to encourage the aircraft to continue. A fantastic yaw rate followed, only to be spoiled by the anti-spin logic. The anti-spin logic was surprisingly pronounced. As has been experienced on other high AOA missions, there is ample control authority for arresting yaw rate. Whereas rudder inputs often feel sluggish/gradual or delayed, the anti-spin logic is immediate, abrupt, and forceful.
Quote
Therefore, there were multiple occasions where it would have been tactically sound to accept excessive energy loss in order to achieve a fleeting WEZ. The CLAW prevented such shot opportunities (and hindered defeating shots).
Quote
However, during a dynamic fight, where attention is focused on the bandit rather than the specific AOA, the lateral/directional response was often confusing. There were multiple times where a roll rate was expected yet not achieved or a body-axis yaw rate was expected and beta resulted. In other cases, the response changed during the maneuver as the AOA blended into this region.
Quote
Pitch rates were too slow to prosecute or deny weapons. Loads remained below limits and implied that there may be more maneuverability available to the airframe.

This article was also written about the testing, a couple of months before WIB leaked the test report [Nelson was the test pilot in the report]:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-flies-against-f-16-basic-fighter-maneuvers
Quote
Although the F-35 is designed primarily for attack rather than air combat, U.S. Air Force and Lockheed Martin test pilots say the availability of potential margin for additional maneuverability is a testament to the aircraft’s recently proven overall handling qualities and basic flying performance. “The door is open to provide a little more maneuverability,” says Lockheed Martin F-35 site lead test pilot David “Doc” Nelson.
Quote
“It was an early look at any control laws that may need to be tweaked to enable it to fly better in future. You can definitely tweak it—that’s the option.”
Quote
“Pilots really like maneuverability, and the fact that the aircraft recovers so well from a departure allows us to say [to the designers of the flight control system laws], ‘you don’t have to clamp down so tight,’” says Nelson.

And it's not that the F-35 flies like a third-generation fighter (whatever that is) but that aircraft design is full of trades and compromises.
It's not that either, it's just a fact that popular segments of the media have mistakenly or purposefully contributed to the notion (sometimes very literally arguing) that the F-35 is vulnerable to 60 year old fighter designs in a dogfight. Kcran's mistaken / prior judgement of the F-35's agility is not a unique one. I've encountered countless people (and still continue to) who believe things like that the F-35 is inferior to F-16s and F/A-18s in any air-to-air work, that the F-35 has a shorter range than the F-16 & F/A-18, that the F-35 has no utility outside of being a strike aircraft, etc.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2019, 08:00:06 am by Dragon029 »

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2131
Re: Lockheed Martin F-35: News ONLY topic
« Reply #1559 on: January 19, 2019, 09:04:20 am »
It's not that either, it's just a fact that popular segments of the media have mistakenly or purposefully contributed to the notion (sometimes very literally arguing) that the F-35 is vulnerable to 60 year old fighter designs in a dogfight.

I can see why you disagree with this, but actually almost anything can be vulnerable to a 60-year-old design in a dogfight. Tangle with an F-5BR (basic design 1956) upgraded with an HMD and Python 5 and the result is up to chance, particularly as the F-5 will VID you first. And if you're in LO mode in an F-35 you are at a serious disadvantage toast.

I've encountered countless people (and still continue to) who believe things like that the F-35 is inferior to F-16s and F/A-18s in any air-to-air work.

One encounters lots of silly people, and I blame the Internet. Of course LO has advantages in A2A, but you have to be in a position to exploit lower detectability by taking the first effective shot. So while your quoted claim is invalid, it is not a corollary that the F-35 is superior in all A2A under any circumstances.