F-35 flies against A-4s: F-35 pilots lyrical about F-35

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24419
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 06:39

The Graphic attached shows only two pages - some of the few which have been 'annotated' in pencil all those years ago by the instructor who had passed on this NATOPS to me (because it had become superseded by a completely new entirely reprinted version which happened from time to time - rather than just adding / subtracting new/old pages). So the maximum number of 'performance' pages - these only for the engine in the A4G (also all A-4F/Ks and some other variants) at 9,300 of noise - so keep that in mind. The entire NATOPS has the smaller engine found in the A-4E mostly (it can get complicated) data also. The LARGer Engine take off performance pages have been deleted to make the file size limit here.

Remember to click on the graphic to zoom to size or download it also.
Attachments
GraphsX2 Combat Performance Data J52-P-8A A4G NATOPS 1972 TIF.gif
Performance Data J52-P-8A A4G NATOPS 1972 pp72.pdf
(10.6 MiB) Downloaded 267 times
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2342
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 10:30

eloise wrote:Anyone here have EM graph of A-4? how agile it is compare to F-16?
why did they used F-16 + F-35 vs A-4 though ? why not opposite ( F-35+ A-4 vs F-16) ? A-4 seem to have worse kinematic characteristics compared to F-16



I'd have to agree, using an A-4 is no longer tactically representative of future or even current threats.

I understand that the purpose was simply to see how the F-35 would integrate with 4th gen platforms on an operation
but the use of substandard threat equipment may give false impressions of effectiveness.

I'm happy that the Norwegians partially addressed the maneuverability issue with the F-35A but I don't understand what
they mean by "the F-35 is slightly more robust".

He was talking about weight, so maybe what he meant was that the F-35 was less likely to be affected by turbulence or such
Offline

joost

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: 22 May 2010, 10:11
  • Location: Netherlands

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 10:41

Norwegians???!!! You truly are American! :)

I think the article and blog shows more than ever what the F-35 is build for: to gain air domination by using its superior sensors, to share data real time with other assets and to thwart any moves by red forces in a very early stage. That A-4s are used as Red Forces only underlines this more: while the A-4 is agile, it is useless against an adversary that has the situational awareness and means to counter....how good the maneuverability is. Reminds me of a scene in a movie, where a ship is entered. At one scene two adversaries are facing each other. One is making all kinds of impressive karate moves. The other just draws a gun and shoots him. That is how I look at the F-35 versus older "dogfighting" fighters. Impressive if you can turn and twist, but useless if that does not bring the kill!
Offline

MD

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 282
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2004, 11:25

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 10:43

zero-one wrote:
I'd have to agree, using an A-4 is no longer tactically representative of future or even current threats.


Meh. I can see the A-4 for WVR representation of L-39 style threats or possibly the few remaining MiG-17 variants around. Doesn't hurt for some good dissimilar work.
Offline

joost

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: 22 May 2010, 10:11
  • Location: Netherlands

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 11:20

Next blog translated for you:

Here in dutch and also with some nice pictures!: https://www.defensie.nl/onderwerpen/f-3 ... htsvlieger

Thursday August 27
No surprises
"I have seen this yesterday," I thought to myself before my first flight with the F-35, on November 18, 2014. The day before I had my first 'test flight rehearsal' in the simulator. In it I flew exactly the trip that I would fly the next day in real life.
The F-35 simulator is extremely good, very real. In the F-35 you cannot fly in a backseat contrary to the F-16. So practice the basic flying, every emergency procedure and every mission extensively on a simulator. And your first flight is directly “for real”.
Beforehand I knew it would be cool, but once in the sim it was super. The virtual world around you is very realistic. Identical to the real situation, including the weather conditions.
On the day itself the only thing that was new was boarding the aircraft. I was perfectly prepared for the flying. I turned on the starter motor, closed the canopy, called the tower and from that moment it was just okay. No nerves, no surprises, I knew exactly what to do.
Only boarding is laborious. Youclick your 5-point harness, connecting connectors include your oxygen, communication and survival kit. And then your helmet. Summed up it seems like a whole exercise, but you get used to it quickly.
The cockpit is larger and more spacious than the F-16. At missions over Afghanistan, I was sometimes built in between all my cards, lunch boxes and drinks. Now I have much more space. Compared to the F-16, there are fewer buttons and switches. In front of me, I have a kind of mega-iPad. Most buttons are on my throttle and my stick. Thus learning to work is like learning to play the piano: you have to be nimble-fingered and then everything goes on intuition.
Smiley
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2342
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 11:44

joost wrote:Norwegians???!!! You truly are American! :)

I think the article and blog shows more than ever what the F-35 is build for: to gain air domination by using its superior sensors, to share data real time with other assets and to thwart any moves by red forces in a very early stage. That A-4s are used as Red Forces only underlines this more: while the A-4 is agile, it is useless against an adversary that has the situational awareness and means to counter....how good the maneuverability is. Reminds me of a scene in a movie, where a ship is entered. At one scene two adversaries are facing each other. One is making all kinds of impressive karate moves. The other just draws a gun and shoots him. That is how I look at the F-35 versus older "dogfighting" fighters. Impressive if you can turn and twist, but useless if that does not bring the kill!


Even in a kinematic point of view, the A-4 no longer accurately depicts the threats we see today. You are correct in saying that the A-4 is like a guy doing all kinds of karate moves. No guns, wearing bright white clothes and a black belt.
He will instantly get killed in any kind of modern shooting war.

But thats not what an enemy sends out. they will more likely send out special ops units that are these big muscle bound guys that are armed with all sorts of long range rifles and also experts in close quarter combat even with a knife.

Thats what a good air dominance platform looks like, you cannot simply rely on one particular strength and dismiss the other as useless.

Never leave out the possibility that an adversary may find it's way to a flight of F-35, because once you have a guy at your 6, no amount of data sharing can shake him off you. you'll need to rely on what the F-35 can actually do in order to get out of that situation.
Offline

f35phixer

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 160
  • Joined: 13 May 2009, 22:38

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 12:26

one other thing to note, we will not need to have external LFE blue training pods hanging, we will use P5, so always representive of a day one configuration for training.....
Offline

reaper

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015, 06:56

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 12:46

eloise wrote:Anyone here have EM graph of A-4? how agile it is compare to F-16?
why did they used F-16 + F-35 vs A-4 though ? why not opposite ( F-35+ A-4 vs F-16) ? A-4 seem to have worse kinematic characteristics compared to F-16


Because the purpose of the test was to look at interoperability maybe? Having the F-16 as red air and the A-4 on their side wouldn't have worked.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3040
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 12:52

Anyone here ever fought a slick A-4 w a 408 engine?

...very competitive with F-16 in certain parts of the E-M diagram. Until they retired them, IAF guys (the dudes w the blue star of david in the roundel) were very good at fighting the "6 decade-old" design competitively against their own Vipers.

Give them 'a helmet' and a HOBS missile and the Scooters are a handful.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3040
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 13:05

reaper wrote:
eloise wrote:Anyone here have EM graph of A-4? how agile it is compare to F-16?
why did they used F-16 + F-35 vs A-4 though ? why not opposite ( F-35+ A-4 vs F-16) ? A-4 seem to have worse kinematic characteristics compared to F-16


Because the purpose of the test was to look at interoperability maybe?


Ding, ding. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner...
Offline

treebeard

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 49
  • Joined: 24 May 2010, 11:47
  • Location: NL

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 16:37

The purpose was indeed focused on interoperability between the F-35 and F-16 as well as between the F-35 and KDC-10.

But then again, other set ups for test engagements are not necessarily ruled out;
"In support of the exercise, the Royal Netherlands Air Force also brought in six F-16s from the 162nd Fighter Wing, Arizona Air National Guard to serve as either allied or adversary aircraft, along with a KDC-10 Air Refueling tanker from the Royal Netherlands Air Force 334th Transport Squadron at Eindhoven Airport, Netherlands."


According to the Dutch pilot, the more complex missions would be flown somewhere at the end of this week.
"Do not be hasty."
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 714
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post28 Aug 2015, 17:09

Quick test of your attention to detail...
One of these planes doesn't need external fuel tanks to go play air-2-air combat.


Can you pick out which one it is????


150827_F_ZZ999_002.jpg
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 879
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post29 Aug 2015, 08:35

Hey Spaz are those two different A-4 models in archeman's picture?
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7720
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post29 Aug 2015, 08:56

eloise wrote: why not opposite ( F-35+ A-4 vs F-16) ?

You train the way you intend to fight. F-35s are not going to partner with A-4s in the real world.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

m

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 694
  • Joined: 01 Jan 2011, 23:40
  • Location: NL

Unread post29 Aug 2015, 09:19

Discovery Air Defence Deploys A-4 Skyhawks to Support the German Air Force in Italy

Quote: Montreal, June 25, 2015 - Discovery Air Defence Services Inc. ("DA Defence"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Discovery Air Inc. has deployed McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawks to Decimomannu Air Base in Sardinia, Italy. The DA Defence Skyhawks are providing Red Air adversary training support to German Air Force (Luftwaffe) Eurofighters on deployment in Italy.

DA Defence is providing Red Air mission training embedded with Eurofighters from the Luftwaffe's Tactical Air Force Wing 73 "Steinhoff." The training exercise in Decimomannu is scheduled for completion in late June.

"This first deployment to Italy demonstrates the confidence and trust by the Luftwaffe for DA Defence to deliver air combat training of the highest order," said Daniel Gibeau, Chief Operating Officer of DA Defence. "Our modernized McDonnell Douglas A-4 Skyhawks are flying dissimilar air combat training missions against the best of the Luftwaffe. Our capabilities, people and experience continue to contribute to the finest combat pilots for Germany and directly to readiness for NATO missions."
http://www.discoveryair-ds.com/page?a=1538&lang=en-CA

Red Air
January 10, 2011 - Truth Duty Valour Episode 409 Exercise Maple Flag - War Games in the Sky - this segment explains the role of Red Air.
http://www.discoveryair-ds.com/page?a=497&lang=en-CA
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests