Forum: F-35 Lightning II

After the flight tests (so far), can we now know for sure if the JSF is an agile fighter like the F-16???

F-16.net Sponsor

You're not going to hear about until after it actually gets into the field. The performance charts won't be released for a long time but you'll begin to hear anecdotal stories soon after the jets get to operational units - still a couple years away.

I am not sure you will ever get a straight answer to that question because of the differences in how the F-35 and F-16 are going to be set up on the flight line for normal operations. The F-35 will have clean wings on the flight line where as the F-16 will have dirty wings.

Well F-18 pilots have said that it's comparable/better in handling to the Hornet, so I suspect that should give some clues, and Jon Beesley(who's flown F-16s and F-22s), compared it favorably as well. The speed and high G testing are going on now, so the envelope, so I suspect more info will be available before too long.

Quote:

In the meantime, and without discussing specific performance characteristics, Italian air force fighter pilots involved with the F-35 program tell Aviation Week that the aircraft’s performance falls “between the F-16 and the F/A-18 in terms of flight envelope—and is actually closer to the F/A-18, considering its high angle of attack and slow-speed maneuvering capabilities.”
The F-35A, with an air-to-air mission takeoff weight of 49,540 lb., has a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.85 and a wing loading of 110 lb. per sq. ft.—not ideal for a dog-fighter. The F135 engine delivers 42,000 lb. thrust, and industry officials suggest that an F-35 entering an air-to-air engagement with 40%—or more than 7,275 lb.—of internal fuel will have a thrust-to-weight ratio of 1.09 and a wing loading of 83 lb. per sq. ft. Those figures describe an agile, albeit not top-end, fighter.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... 030509.xml

I just have the feeling that we'll all be pleasantly surprised with the F-35's performance and the naysayers will be silenced. Fighter technology these days is killing traditional dogfighting as we know it and the F-35 has got ALL the bells and whistles. Even if an air to air engagement in the F-35 does degrade to a knife fight I would LOVE to have the F/A-18's nose pointing ability in my bag of tricks. I fail to see how that is a bad thing.

weez wrote:

I just have the feeling that we'll all be pleasantly surprised with the F-35's performance and the naysayers will be silenced. Fighter technology these days is killing traditional dogfighting as we know it and the F-35 has got ALL the bells and whistles.

I'm not so sure of that. I highly doubt the F-35 will be able to match an F-16 in terms of agility, but that's not to suggest (as you've indicated by advanced technology) that is a bad thing.

While the objective behind dogfighting has always been for a fighter to lock its nose on the target, the HMD and AIM-9x could easily change that completely. Whether the F-35 could match anything or not doesn't matter, so long as it could manage to keep the target within the ~80 degrees or so of the AIM-9x's zone of acquisition.

Some agility will be required, but certainly it's not nearly as important as once it was in air combat. The F-35 can do well enough without thrust vectoring or super-agility, so long as it's got a countermeasure like the AIM-9x.

F-35 Tests Proceed, Revealing F/A-18-Like Performance By DAVE MAJUMDAR : 16 May 2011

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i= ... 6b652b%2C0

"...Operational pilots should be thrilled with the F-35's performance, Kelly said. The F-35 Energy-Management diagrams, which display an aircraft's energy and maneuvering performance within its airspeed range and for different load factors, are similar to the F/A-18 but the F-35 offers better acceleration at certain points of the flight envelope.

"The E-M diagrams are very similar between the F-35B, F-35C and the F/A-18. There are some subtle differences in maximum turn rates and some slight differences in where corner airspeeds are exactly," Kelly said.

Thomas, who is also an F/A-18 pilot and a graduate of the Navy's Top Gun program and the Marines' Weapons and Tactics Instructor Course, agreed that all three variants should be lethal in the within-visual-range fight...."

bsac said: "... Whether the F-35 could match anything or not doesn't matter, so long as it could manage to keep the target within the ~80 degrees or so of the AIM-9x's zone of acquisition...." F-35 sensors see 360 degrees, pilot does not need to move head to fire.

AIM-9X achieves milestone C Jul 13, 2011

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... mp;id=4693

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – The Navy’s Air-to-Air Missile Systems Program Office (PMA-259) reached a Milestone C decision June 24 for the AIM-9X Sidewinder Block II missile, thus authorizing the system to enter low rate initial production.

PMA-259’s industry partner, Raytheon, will begin production of more than 5,000 operational AIM-9X Block II rounds for U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force warfighters over the life of the program.

“This milestone allows us to provide U.S. and allied fighter pilots upgraded missiles which are needed to dominate air combat in an increasingly challenging threat environment,” said Capt. John Martins, PMA-259 program manager.

The AIM-9X Block II program corrects obsolescence issues and provides performance upgrades to the highly successful, fifth generation infrared-guided air-to-air-missile, AIM-9X Block I program. Obsolescence changes include updates for the guidance unit electronic circuit card assemblies, battery, and the active optical target detector (Fuze). The Block II has ability to operate with impunity against modern threat radar counter measures such as Digital RF Memory Jammers, Towed Decoys, and Stealth airframes.

Performance upgrades to Block II variant include the addition of advanced capabilities to maintain warfighter advantage in the visual arena and meet requirements for beyond visual range employment. These technical improvements focus on seeker performance, infrared counter-countermeasures, kinematics, and lock-on after launch supported by a data-link.

“The AIM-9 is one of the oldest and most successful missiles in the U.S. weapons inventory, Martins added. “The Sidewinder continues to be the most widely used air-to-air missile and is currently employed by more than 40 nations throughout the world.”

To date, more than 4,500 AIM-9X Block I missiles and 175 AIM-9X Block II captive air training missiles and test rounds have been fielded."

battleshipagincourt wrote:

I'm not so sure of that. I highly doubt the F-35 will be able to match an F-16 in terms of agility, but that's not to suggest (as you've indicated by advanced technology) that is a bad thing.

The F-35 should not only match but exceed the F-16's agility/acceleration. That's an important thing to remember.

Quote:

While the objective behind dogfighting has always been for a fighter to lock its nose on the target, the HMD and AIM-9x could easily change that completely. Whether the F-35 could match anything or not doesn't matter, so long as it could manage to keep the target within the ~80 degrees or so of the AIM-9x's zone of acquisition.

Some agility will be required, but certainly it's not nearly as important as once it was in air combat. The F-35 can do well enough without thrust vectoring or super-agility, so long as it's got a countermeasure like the AIM-9x.

The F-35 can engage targets in a 360 degree sphere around the plane. The missile's seeker isn't the limitation for engagement in other words, as the F-35's sensors will be providing the targeting info. This gives it a significant advantage in WVR, should a foe survive a BVR engagement. This coverage is with both the AIM-9X and the AIM-120D, lest anyone comment on the current lack of internal carriage for the former.

while your opponent take 5-6 seconds to turn the nose of his plane (post merge) to get his HOBS lock on you, you just increase separation and lob the -120D over your shoulder. Good tactic. You always have first shot and you dont bleed energy in a turn.

The comparison to the F-18's maneuverability is encouraging to me and seems to already suggest a degree of agility over the F-16 (at least at slower speeds) for the F-35. A viper driver who gets too slow in BFM with a Hornet has made a serious tactical error. A slow turning fight and nose pointing ability is one of the Hornet's strong suits and would be a great asset for the Lightning II combined with the 9g high energy performance (of the A model at least). As wrightwing already mentioned, the F-35's 360 degree sphere of engagement will give it a HUGE advantage over any opponent even without Raptor like maneuverability. Why turn with the guy at all? Hopefully, though, this doesn't foster too much reliance on the aircraft's technology and the BFM gets trained out of the pilots. At any rate, I'm not concerned in the least with the F-35's performance.

Guys, with all respect...

1) AIM-9X and AIM-120C/D will probably not be the most optimal, or superior 'OTS' over-the-shoulder employed AAM (friend or foe) in the first place. (ponder a high-kinetic performing + TVC missile such as an AIM-variant ESSM perhaps (e.g., if JDRADM is too expensive or delayed) and then one could hypothesize more interesting tactics employed by the launch platform)
2) 'OTS' fired AAM will not likely give the same pK as a forward zone fired AAM and as such, will probably not want to be the tactic of choice.
3) The F-35 might not necessarily have this actual 360 deg weapon lock-on and digital linking capability in the first place, until block IV-V? Could be wrong, but I recall some follow-on upgrades suggesting this cape described in the Norway doc.
4) The F-35, once IOC, safe to say will probably not have a monopoly on 'OTS' engagement capability.
5) ATDIRCM counter measures in future will further counter pK.
6) It is still too early to ascertain whether an F-35A (e.g., armed with under-wing Heat-seekers) will be as agile as an F-16 with its tanks punched and only 2 AIM-9/IRIS-T. For one thing, one might be curious how the wing-tip vortices (see contrails) might affect instantaneous rates and min radius turns, etc. (if any effect at all). We'll have to wait & see.
7) Undoubtedly, high-performance + agility will still be of critical relevance probably for another 20 yrs at least, or until the 6th gen stuff comes out perhaps.

geogen wrote:

Guys, with all respect...

1) AIM-9X and AIM-120C/D will probably not be the most optimal, or superior 'OTS' over-the-shoulder employed AAM (friend or foe) in the first place. (ponder a high-kinetic performing + TVC missile such as an AIM-variant ESSM perhaps (e.g., if JDRADM is too expensive or delayed) and then one could hypothesize more interesting tactics employed by the launch platform)

but an even heavier missile would be more optimized for a WVR shot? The AIM-9X Block I has already demonstrated a robust HOBS capability, and the Block II's WEZ is considerably larger(and has the added benefit of LOAL). The -120D's WEZ will be even larger(albeit with a longer minimum distance).

Quote:

2) 'OTS' fired AAM will not likely give the same pK as a forward zone fired AAM and as such, will probably not want to be the tactic of choice.

It may not be the tactic of choice, but for the F-35, it's at least an option. Additionally, the F-35 would likely have the ability to set itself up for the most advantageous attitude, in relation to its foe, further mitigating the need to rely solely on agility.

Quote:

3) The F-35 might not necessarily have this actual 360 deg weapon lock-on and digital linking capability in the first place, until block IV-V? Could be wrong, but I recall some follow-on upgrades suggesting this cape described in the Norway doc.

It wasn't the Block of F-35 that was the limitation. It was the availability of the -120D and -9X Block II. The sensors, and fusion are already present in Block III.

Quote:

4) The F-35, once IOC, safe to say will probably not have a monopoly on 'OTS' engagement capability.

I think it's safe to say this is incorrect. Which competitor/foe will have a functioning EODAS like system by 2016-2018? Certainly not the Typhoon, Rafale, Gripen, Super Hornet. It remains to be seen what the PAK FA and J-20 will feature.

Quote:

6) It is still too early to ascertain whether an F-35A (e.g., armed with under-wing Heat-seekers) will be as agile as an F-16 with its tanks punched and only 2 AIM-9/IRIS-T. For one thing, one might be curious how the wing-tip vortices (see contrails) might affect instantaneous rates and min radius turns, etc. (if any effect at all). We'll have to wait & see.

The F-35 with 5000lbs of weapons is alleged to be more agile than a clean F-16, so I seriously doubt 2 -9Xs will alter that. We shall see.

Quote:

7) Undoubtedly, high-performance + agility will still be of critical relevance probably for another 20 yrs at least, or until the 6th gen stuff comes out perhaps.

Situational awareness will be even more valuable though, as the first person to maneuver into optimal position, will have an advantage(even if the foe is more agile).

I'd be more interested in hearing of a comparison between the -35 and the flankers/Fulcrums of the world. This is a complicated discussion with a lot of variables that need to be defined to get into the OPs questions.

But certainly, the PakFa, from my persepective doesn't look like it could hold a candle to the -35A in the so called 'kinife fight.'

Forum: F-35 Lightning II

F-35 viper agility