some F35 info

[razor1uk]

I like the way in that small clipet of non-info, and that in the pictural comment, that they call it a fast jet (so not a fighter, bomber, attacker, strike or recon or R&D prod' phase jet then - I'm being pedantic), naturally nowerdays all jets are fast; faster than turboprops, certainly most of the time at least; perhaps things are going slower than usual at the moment?, testing on carriers will naturally include some slow speeds during VL portion of STOVL test so...

 

[Glider]

I like the way in that small clipet of non-info, and that in the pictural comment, that they call it a fast jet (so not a fighter, bomber, attacker, strike or recon or R&D prod' phase jet then - I'm being pedantic), naturally nowerdays all jets are fast; faster than turboprops, certainly most of the time at least; perhaps things are going slower than usual at the moment?, testing on carriers will naturally include some slow speeds during VL portion of STOVL test so...

Personally what I got out of the short (non- info clip?) was how confident, solid and positive the F35 is when landing on a carrier. Anyone who has seen a traditional Harrier landing on a carrier will immediately see the difference.

 

[Torch]

What last years engine fire looked like.http://theaviationist.com/2015/06/06/f-35-engine-fire-images/

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I just got back from a trip to California. One of my LMCO buddies told me that the Marine sea trials went very well. He heard through the grapvine one aircraft had a minor maintence issue that was quickly fixed.

Marine F-35 pilots conduct 'dogfights' during sea trials

 

[Torch]

And the discussions continue..Pentagon says damning report of F-35 troubles 'doesn't tell the entire story' - The Washington Post,,,,,,,,,,,,,http://theaviationist.com/2015/07/01/f-35s-role-in-green-flag/

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Once again more BS. The aircraft is a strike aircraft, if you fight VR you've wasted 90 million dollars. No one explains this or that fact that this test was done to place the F-35 at an absolute disadvantage. Do the same test BVR in IMC condition and see what happens.

 

[Torch]

That original f16 vs F35 was against basically a plane Jane F35 without it's full potential incorporated, Interesting discussion going on over on the SigForum, amazing how many people literally hate the F35,so much of it based on false hoods.

 

[pbehn]

Once again more BS. The aircraft is a strike aircraft, if you fight VR you've wasted 90 million dollars. No one explains this or that fact that this test was done to place the F-35 at an absolute disadvantage. Do the same test BVR in IMC condition and see what happens.

Can someone explain what is "visual range"? If an enemy is headed in your direction at mach 2 what does it mean?

 

[GrauGeist]

I've been seeing this regurgitated all over FB lately and have gotten into more than a few heated discussions.

I challenged those people to name me ONE piece of deceloped hardware that didn't get into at least a cost over-run, was behind projected delivery/service date or became embroiled in a congressional debate (mostly between bickering asshats who were either defending or attacking personal interests).

Everyone still "ohhs and ahhs" at the F-16. There is a PRIME example of congressional poop-storm, costly delays, public outcry (the same old line: we still have top of the line stuff...we don't need the F-16) and so on.

And then, in this article, I see this:
"And to add insult to injury, the JSF flier discovered he couldn't even comfortably move his head inside the radar-evading jet's cramped cockpit. "The helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft." That allowed the F-16 to sneak up on him."

Sooo...after all these years of combat aircraft getting cutting edge electronics, the F-35 has reverted to WWII combat tactics instead of having the most sophisticated electronics suite on earth to tell him exactly where the F-16 is?

What a load of bullsh!t.

 

[Greyman]

That allowed the F-16 to sneak up on him.

I imagine that was just the reporter not fully grasping what he was reading. I interpreted that as the F-35 pilot losing sight of the F-16 during the actual scrap.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Can someone explain what is "visual range"? If an enemy is headed in your direction at mach 2 what does it mean?

you can see them, that simple

 

[GrauGeist]

I imagine that was just the reporter not fully grasping what he was reading. I interpreted that as the F-35 pilot losing sight of the F-16 during the actual scrap.

Sure, in a close-quarter engagement, even an F-18 or MiG-29 (or any aircraft, for that matter) will have blind spots such as low 12, low 6 and virtually any position down and away.

While readin that article, I also got the impression that the F-16 pilot had difficulty spotting the F-35 initially.

However, if you've allowed an aggressor to get in that close, in spite of all your tools available, you're not doing your job right...

 

[Greyman]

Interesting read (english translation at bottom)
«Dogfight» og F-35 (Dogfighting and the F-35) |


EDIT: this one is also interesting.
F-16 Vs. F-35 In A Dogfight: JPO, Air Force Weigh In On Who's Best « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary

This bit make me think, heh ...

"I've said for years and will continue to do so until the defense troglodytes finally get it (and some are slowly coming around)—5th generation aircraft are not 'fighters'—they are 'sensor-shooters' optimized for different threat regimes, and can perform the roles of "F," "B," "A," "RC," "E," "EA," and AWACS aircraft of the past."

 

[pbehn]

In defence of the F-35: Why future air combat will be different - Telegraph

 

[pbehn]

you can see them, that simple

An A380 is in visual range of an F35 long before vice versa. My question was is there a distance that in military terms is regarded as "beyond visual range". Spotting an airliner with 4 contrails can be done for as far as the horizon reaches. Spotting a plane headed towards you with no conrail or heavy exhaust is much much more difficult.

 

[Greyman]

Due to weather conditions visual range is also something that can change minute to minute, especially when we're talking about the speeds of modern jets.

 

[GrauGeist]

...Spotting a plane headed towards you with no conrail or heavy exhaust is much much more difficult.

The handy little display and bright, shiny indicator lights will tell you what it is and where it is long before the human eye can discern the dark dot. And the subsequent AAM launch will keep it that way...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

An A380 is in visual range of an F35 long before vice versa. My question was is there a distance that in military terms is regarded as "beyond visual range". Spotting an airliner with 4 contrails can be done for as far as the horizon reaches. Spotting a plane headed towards you with no conrail or heavy exhaust is much much more difficult.

It's being able to spot the aircraft be it 1 mile or 10. There is no reason to try to start a dogfight 'visual' when you could track and kill an enemy 100 miles away

 

[Glider]

A personal view, but to me the biggest danger to the F35 in combat isn't the enemy but Politian's. Everyone agrees that the big advantage the F35 has is its ability to identify and target the enemy before it is identified by the enemy.
The danger is that the rules of engagement as defined by our illustrious leaders, will not allow BVR combat

 

[Lucky13]

Would the F-16 incident be this then....?

F-35 fighter makers leap to its defence after it loses dogfight to 1970s jet