Forum: F-35 Variants and Missions

Gets better after what? The grey points on the graph are tagged "coverage". You'll notice that they are interspersed, seemingly randomly, with the moderate and severe buffet markers and that one is frequently right next to the other, that is, normal flight to severe buffet without the pilot doing anything particularly special. Remember that this was largely unexpected in this particular flight regime and that the real testing begins in the next few months with the results probably not available till 2014 (when's IOC again?).

Voice command sounds like fun:
PILOT: T.a.a.a.r.r.r.r.g.g.g.e.e.e.t.t.t...t.t.t.h.h.h.r.r.r.e.e.e.e.e...f.f.f.i.i.i.r.r.e.e.e.!.!
F-35: Voice command not recognized. Say again.
PILOT: T.a.a.a.r.r.r.r.g.g.g.e.e.e.t.t.t...t.t.t.h.h.h.r.r.r.e.e.e.e.e...f.f.f.i.i.i.r.r.e.e.e.!.!
F-35: Voice command not recognized. Say again.
CLIPPY:(ping)Hi, I'm clippy, you appear to be trying to...launch a short range air to air weapon. Can I help?
PILOT: A.a.a.a.a.a.ah.h.h....e.e.j.j.j.e.e.c.c.t.t.!.!...e.e.e.j.j.j.e.e.e.c.c.c.t.t.!.!

You misunderstood my comment first of all. Secondly, it's not arrogance to state a fact. On a systems level, there aren't any near peers, much less anyone remotely close to surpassing the variety of capabilities that are in our inventory. You're using simplistic reasoning, in order to create a scenario that fits your narrative. I simply explained the technical limitations which would make your scenario unlikely. If you don't know that you need to jam a platform, or where that platform is, or have a jammer that not only has the capability to jam the particular emitter in question, but is in the correct location, of have enough of these jammers, in the correct locations, etc.. it's simply not feasible to do what you're asserting. Then factor in the fact that these emitters aren't stationary, so unless the jammers are on airborne platforms, that can maintain the same aspect at all times(and assuming that the F-35s, etc... won't utilize any offsetting tactics), then the potential to jam would only exist in very narrow windows of time.

Certainly I have no arguments for the above statements....in the short term. But we are being sold a bill of goods that says this plane is going to be a dominant platform through the 2050s. I simply do not believe, as firmly as you do, that the enemy won't be able to overcome the difficulties you state through technology of their own in the 30s, 40s and 50s.

While it's true we can continue to upgrade, it is also true that many of our most advanced programs have been penetrated by the Chinese and others.

This is further compounded by the number of foreign customers for the F-35. To assume none of them will have individuals or systems compromised is naive.

In short, I simply believe at some point, the F-35 will be forced into a dogfight in which the skill of the pilot and maneuverability of the plane will be the deciding factors.

@redbird....... I think you have been watching to much Top Gun. The fact is that the lethality and turning ability of modern missiles is such that even considering getting in to a turning fight with another aircraft may be suicidal for a modern fighter pilot.

With the introduction of HOBS & LOAL missiles and systems like EODAS, the days of "I can't get tone" are almost gone.

It's a lot easier, faster, and cheaper to develop a high performance missile than to develop a fighter to employ older missiles more effectively.

All twin tail fighters have buffeting, etc.. issues.

Inability? Show me a source for that. You're using the tired old argument- it hasn't done that yet, therefore it can't do that.

I feel comfortable excepting what pilots who've flown Raptors, Super Hornets, Vipers, etc.. have to say, rather than relying on brochures, or aviation lobbyists from Australia.

The F-35 will always enjoy advantages over an aircraft with a larger RCS. The latter can always upgrade avionics, but not to the extent to completely offset its disadvantages. You're also assuming that the F-35 is in stasis, while all other opponents are continually upgrading.

The full envelope hasn't been explored yet. These charts don't represent what hasn't been tested yet.

Presumably, if the pilot is pulling high Gs, then his hand is on the control stick(which includes the trigger, and toggle for target selection). The beauty of spherical engagement is that high G turns aren't necessary to engage a target. That doesn't mean that they're not available in the event that it becomes necessary to turn hard.

Yeah, but you were trying to claim that the F-35 is agile, plainly it isn’t.

The flight envelope has not been cleared beyond 20 degrees, thus, it cannot currently be flown at AOA greater than 20 degrees. It’s simple stuff Wrightwing I don’t get why you can’t see it.

Me too but if a Raptor pilot says that the F-35 can (can mind you not will) pull 20 Gs backwards while unloading its entire ordinance load would you believe him?

I think you missed my point. The F-35 will enjoy an advantage over other aircraft as long as those other aircraft use what are effectively legacy x-band radars to try to detect and track him. Obviously the opposition is rapidly addressing this issue as evidenced by the innovation in newer SAM radars and bolt on solutions for existing combat aircraft.

Exactly what I was pointing out above.

This was just a bit of silliness to illustrate what would happen if you were trying to issue commands while the aircraft is experiencing severe buffeting. Under those conditions it’s questionable if you’d be able to keep your eye on an aircraft, the instruments or anything with the whole plane shaking under you like that. Playing with the HOTOL under those conditions could have interesting results and even voice commands might be iffy as I attempted to illustrate.