Forum: F-35 Lightning II

flyboy22 wrote:

Sorry but I can't comment on all the speculation.

If you are who you say you are, that's a good answer.

jeffb wrote:

I'm guessing here Spudman but that information *should* be classified. I don't think it's the throw distance that's the big factor with the F-22, it the fact that it can approach a target at a significantly higher altitude (60k) and speed (M1.8 ) than an F-35(45k/M1.1 or 1.6 if you're willing to burn the extra gas). The high altitude and speed reduce any SAM engagement zone size and response time significantly and that's before you consider the F-22s stealth which is better than the F-35's. That's on ingress, on egress it has the option to leave at M1.8 if there's no hurry or 2.5M+ if there is. Essentially it's the low risk option for well protected targets as it can get in and out of even the best protected areas the easiest.

Good guess. The answer is indeed classified and involves a number of specific things that are unique to the F-22.

F-16.net Sponsor

SpudmanWP wrote:

btw, the F-35 can get up to 50,000+ft and mach 1.67, so the F-22 does not have a big advantage here.

The fact is that he got caught embellishing the F-22's capability and has no way to back it up.

How does a 20,000 ft + service ceiling and .8 mach speed advantage possibly not constitute a significant advantage? The F-22's capabilities under military power are marginally better than an F-35 in full afterburner... is that the slight advantage you're referring to? Because an F-35 under military power certainly as well won't remotely approach its maximum speed or altitude... and lighting its afterburners at the expense of stealth to match the F-22 is exactly the reason it's inferior at providing that added kinetic energy you would want behind a projectile that you're dropping.

That's right... all these details are classified, so there's no way to trust for sure what either fighter can actually do. Actually one of the things about the F-35 many people don't realize is that it's never gone beyond mach 1.3. So its official maximum speed and altitude records still have a long way to go before they meet and possibly exceed estimates.

Is it possible that the F-35's speed will go up during testing? After all, I remember when the F-22 was rated at only 1.8 mach at full AB.

BSAC said: "Actually one of the things about the F-35 many people don't realize is that it's never gone beyond mach 1.3." Wowee - the aircraft is under test:

"...Ultimately, the test program will push the three variants of the aircraft to 50,000 feet, Mach 1.6 and 700 knots...."

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopi ... art-0.html

Joint Strike Fighter acing tests, pilots report By Dave Majumdar - Staff writer Feb 26, 2011

For all the flak its taking I'd laugh if it did super cruise at M1.4

meatshield wrote:

For all the flak its taking I'd laugh if it did super cruise at M1.4

This is the point many critics fail to grasp. The F-35 may or may not be able to cruise at >M1, in dry thrust(and I suspect that it can, based on several remarks I've seen alluding to that, and having read that it can fly at M.95 at 40% of dry thrust)), but the only evidence that they use is LM's claim. They refuse to accept the distinction that LM uses(I.e. supercruising = M1.5 or higher) vs the European manufacturers(M1 or higher), with regards to what constitutes supercruising.

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

WSJ: Reduce F-35 Buy, Build More F-22's!