F-35 preferred by pilots in WVR over 4th Gens, outturns A-10

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

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7676
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post11 Aug 2016, 08:20

@rented, you wouldn't know it but on these boards maus is a serial offender in highlighting LM support in connection with articles/reports favorable to the F-35.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2033
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post11 Aug 2016, 13:30

Sadly, good news about the F-35 doesn't travel fast and loud. This last article has made very little shock waves across
aviation sites.

Besides the original link, I found only 3 sights who picked up on the news:
http://www.businessinsider.com/why-f-35 ... ion-2016-8
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pilot ... le/2598652
and
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... -the-17266

Surprisingly the 3rd one is from Dave Majumdar who is putting the F-35 in high praises lately, isn't he a long time critic?

But unlike the AOA control laws test where the F-35 "lost" to an F-16, this news isn't turning heads the same way
Offline
User avatar

Dragon029

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1336
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014, 07:13

Unread post11 Aug 2016, 13:55

Someone dug this up; it's not in response to comments on this F-35 survey, but it's from the same author:

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/15/her ... ent-165197

This past week the above news story called into question my integrity as a defense analyst—a charge never before leveled at me in my 15 years working in defense policy, both in and out of government.

The heart of the story is that my support for the Lockheed Martin-built F-22 fighter while I worked as a defense fellow at a Washington think tank was tied to that think tank’s receiving a donation from Lockheed.

...

To correct the record, here are the facts.

1. The foundation I worked at is funded primarily by small donors writing checks under $1,000. This means the think tank could boast of having over 750,000 supporters. Corporate donations amounted to roughly 3% of the think tank’s annual income. In short, if Lockheed Martin had never given a cent, it would have made hardly a blip on the institute’s finances.

2. More importantly, there was a firewall between specific donations to the think tank and the analysts – including myself. This was specifically intended to prevent the influence of donations on the analysis we produced, as well as to prevent even the illusion of collusion.

3. If my work had been truly influenced by corporate donations from Lockheed Martin, I would not have advocated cutting in half the planned buy of the Littoral Combat Ship, a ship being built by Lockheed Martin. Nor would I have continued to argue for maintaining the F-22 production line when the corporation itself was willing to kill the program in an effort to keep production robust for its other new stealth aircraft, the F-35.


More in the link.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5872
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post11 Aug 2016, 15:52

zero-one wrote:Sadly, good news about the F-35 doesn't travel fast and loud. This last article has made very little shock waves across
aviation sites.

Besides the original link, I found only 3 sights who picked up on the news:
http://www.businessinsider.com/why-f-35 ... ion-2016-8
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pilot ... le/2598652
and
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-bu ... -the-17266

Surprisingly the 3rd one is from Dave Majumdar who is putting the F-35 in high praises lately, isn't he a long time critic?

But unlike the AOA control laws test where the F-35 "lost" to an F-16, this news isn't turning heads the same way


Dave Publishes whatever gets him his next paycheck. If he gets an A-10 pilot crying into his beer about how the F-35 is inferior he publishes it. If the USN tells him it's the future of the CVN he publishes it
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5872
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post11 Aug 2016, 15:54

Dragon029 wrote:Someone dug this up; it's not in response to comments on this F-35 survey, but it's from the same author:

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/15/her ... ent-165197

This past week the above news story called into question my integrity as a defense analyst—a charge never before leveled at me in my 15 years working in defense policy, both in and out of government.

The heart of the story is that my support for the Lockheed Martin-built F-22 fighter while I worked as a defense fellow at a Washington think tank was tied to that think tank’s receiving a donation from Lockheed.

...

To correct the record, here are the facts.

1. The foundation I worked at is funded primarily by small donors writing checks under $1,000. This means the think tank could boast of having over 750,000 supporters. Corporate donations amounted to roughly 3% of the think tank’s annual income. In short, if Lockheed Martin had never given a cent, it would have made hardly a blip on the institute’s finances.

2. More importantly, there was a firewall between specific donations to the think tank and the analysts – including myself. This was specifically intended to prevent the influence of donations on the analysis we produced, as well as to prevent even the illusion of collusion.

3. If my work had been truly influenced by corporate donations from Lockheed Martin, I would not have advocated cutting in half the planned buy of the Littoral Combat Ship, a ship being built by Lockheed Martin. Nor would I have continued to argue for maintaining the F-22 production line when the corporation itself was willing to kill the program in an effort to keep production robust for its other new stealth aircraft, the F-35.


More in the link.


Maus92, your rebuttle?
Choose Crews
Offline

rented

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 04:57
  • Location: Millner

Unread post12 Aug 2016, 01:11

Hi Blindpilot,

I absolutely did not say that the pilots are liars. You misunderstand the nature by which surveys can be used to push a given side. The pilots would not be liars, the people conducting the survey would be if any misconduct actually occurred. And even then, they'd do their damn best to make it grey.

Please remember that all I said is that the funding from LM to that organisation needs to be kept in mind. I did not say that the survey was useless, but that you'd need to have a close look at it knowing their funding sources.

It is a fair thing to point out.

blindpilot wrote:Hi rented.

You need to know that even if it was suspect, as LM generated, all they did is ... OMG !!! ... go talk to the pilots! Actual primary sources! That was probably motivated by the unbelievable reality that "journalist" these days don't bother to do that. Unbelievable ... but sadly true. Step back, read the quotes and look again. Regardless of anything else your "caution" is rooted on calling a whole lot of qualified pilots liars... ??? Really? You want to do that?

BP
Offline

rented

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 06 Jan 2012, 04:57
  • Location: Millner

Unread post12 Aug 2016, 01:34

Hi Spazsinbad,

I understand and agree, a very small funding source will not beat a very large one. They would appear that they have an interest in remaining impartial to corporate interests.

That is a much better way of handling the pointing out of a source of CoI. You cannot deny that LM gave them money and LM makes the F-35. However, you have reasoned that it is most likely perceived and not actual, and that it is perceived from a very weak logical base :) Some of the responses I saw bordered on ridicule and to a layman reading that, it actually kind of makes him a logical martyr.

spazsinbad wrote:Over on previous page there is a percentage of donations pie chart which shows total corporate donations (I will guess LM included) are only 3% of the total. All those pesky people donors donate the overwhelming majority of donations at 75%. DAMN those Peoples - they spoil a good FUD story. People Power - Power to the Peoples right on - Influence away....
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5872
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post12 Aug 2016, 19:39

It's an election year in the states, so the desire to create "guilt by association" is extremely strong. Logic just kind of goes out the window and a series of implications becomes "evidence" which then gets warped to "fact."

I'm sorry but maus needs more than "you know who gives money to who.." LM is the world's largest defence contractor, Boeing is the world's largest avaition company. Lots of money goes lots of places and that doesn't inStantly translate to bribery or favoritism. If it did everything is suspect and nothing can be believed anything can be dismissed on theory.

I look forward to future Maus posts as the F-35 continues to advance with approval from those flying it, surely they are bribed or bought off in some form or another. The mental gymnastics will only get better, and I can't wait to watch him attempt to limply explain it while continuing to bitterly complain elsewhere.

Hearsay and conjecture are kinds of evidence
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22813
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Aug 2016, 18:50

Air Force F-35 Proponents Strike Back at Critics [LONG POST BEST READ AT SOURCE]
September 2016 Stew Magnuson

"...There is still a lot of work with the avionics and interfaces as well as the software, and those go hand in hand,” said John Venable, a former F-16 pilot with more than 3,000 hours of flying time, who is now a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

There are key components that have yet to be integrated, including parts of the helmet’s display system, a Gatling gun and the ability to shoot Sidewinder missiles. Much of that will be part of the next block of software due in August 2017.

Meanwhile, the aircraft’s defenders such as Venable are beginning to talk about what it can do as opposed to what it can’t yet do. Pilots and tacticians are just scratching the surface when it comes to understanding the aircraft and its fifth-generation capabilities.

“When people talk about situational awareness, it is exponentially higher in this airplane than it has been in any airplane up to this point. And that is a godsend for the guys in the fighter cockpits,” he said in an interview.

Venable penned an Aug. 4 backgrounder report for the foundation in which he interviewed 31 F-35A pilots and asked them to compare their new aircraft with their previous fighters in terms of maneuverability, stealth and tactics.

He noted that fighter pilots were well known for blunt opinions and a lack of tact. As an outsider he was met with a good deal of skepticism.

“When I walked out of these [interviews] I got the gospel on what each man genuinely believed about both of his jets,” he said. Their first aircraft is the love of their life and the F-35A is “the mistress” they are unsure about. The pilots had F-15C, F-16C, F-15E and A-10 backgrounds, but none came from the F-22 community.

Maneuverability in a dogfight has been a big question mark since a leaked report in 2015 called into question the F-35A’s air-to-air performance over a fourth-generation aircraft.

Venable noted at the time of that test F-35A pilots were governed by software control laws, known as CLAWS, that limited them to three to five Gs during turns. There have been big strides since then and they are now limited to seven Gs. Ultimately, they will be allowed nine Gs. For the purpose of the survey, he asked the pilots to consider only what the aircraft can do now at seven Gs and to not speculate on how it would perform when the software no longer restricted them.

All but two of the pilots thought the F-35A outperformed his previous airplane in air-to-air combat engagements. The two who didn’t favored their old F-15Cs in the 9,000-foot perch setup, a high-altitude combat scenario.

In beyond-visual-range scenarios, they all chose the F-35. For setups where energy and maneuverability are critical to success, they chose it 80 percent of the time.

“The F-35A was not designed to be an air superiority fighter, but the pilots interviewed conveyed the picture of a jet that will more than hold its own in that environment — even with its current G and maneuver restrictions,” Venable wrote.

All of the pilots ended up saying that they would choose the F-35 over their previous jet, although Venable said that question wasn’t included in the survey. “I decided to let the numbers speak for themselves,” he said.

Two former F-22 pilots, Maj. Gen. Jeff Harrigian and Col. Max Marosko III, recently published a paper with the Mitchell Institute about the F-35A that they hoped would “demystify things that have been written in publications,” said Harrigian, who directs the F-35A integration office.

The F-35A “allows you to understand where you need to be in the next three to five minutes, where you need to move assets, and to have that battlefield situational awareness to make decisions quicker and better than we could in any other legacy airplane. And that is fundamental to the platform and what it brings to the fight,” he said at a panel discussion where he presented the report, “Fifth Generation Air Combat: Maintaining the Joint Force Advantage.”

The integrated avionics and sensors autonomously fuse and prioritize data for the pilot to reduce his workload “allowing him to focus more on the mission as opposed to managing sensors,” he said.

He also lauded the aircraft’s stealth. “There is nothing like running an intercept and then at the end of the day realizing that no one ever saw you.”

Venable said he walked on an F-35A wings in his street shoes, and it didn’t harm the protective coating that helps provide the plane’s stealth. He could never do that on an F-22, which is known for its sensitive coating. The tougher stealth layer will allow it to be stationed in more austere settings in harsher environments.

“You can park them out in the sun in the open. … Now you’re starting to talk about a real fighter that has the real potential to do what you need to do in a real-world environment,” Venable said.

Harrigian said: “As we look at operations in highly contested environments with modern long-range [surface-to-air missiles], increased air-to-air threats and the capability the threat has these days to move targets and make them mobile … the only aircraft that can get there are modern, fifth-generation aircraft.”

In a fourth-gen fighter, “you might get in there and release the bomb, but the odds of escaping are not high,” he said. “In our minds, it comes down to the ability to kill and survive.” The F-35A has robust defenses against electronic warfare and cyber attacks, but he could not go into details.

The helmet with its internal displays as opposed to a heads-up cockpit display is a real-game changer, both Harrigian and Venable said. [excerpts will be posted on HMDS thread in AVIONICS]

There is still a lot of complex work to be done on the helmet [?], which is expected to be finished in time for the next software upgrade. Meanwhile, the current display that fuses the aircraft’s three main sensors — the radar warning receiver, distributed aperture infrared search and track system, and the passive coherent location system — finds and identifies friendly and enemy aircraft and provides unparalleled situational awareness, Venable said.

Harrigian said: “The F-35 [helmet’s] tremendous capability is really a first step toward providing that asymmetric advantage to the pilot with that situational awareness it provides for communications, navigation and identification capabilities.”

In air combat mode, when the “world is swirling around the pilot,” who may be turning 15 to 30 degrees per second with many aircraft flying around in different directions, keeping track of just the friendly jets is a big challenge, Venable said.

“What this aircraft does is to look in any direction and see who is there and you’ll be able to tell who is a good guy and who is a bad guy,” he said.

Harrigian added that the ability to allow F-35A pilots to be mission commanders will be unmatched.

Air Force tacticians such as Harrigian and Marosko, who is serving as deputy director of air and cyberspace operations at Headquarters Pacific Air Forces in Hawaii, are just beginning to look at not only what the F-35A can do, but what it will be able to accomplish flying in teams with fourth-gen aircraft as well as joint forces and allies.

The F-35A will have to address threats covering an entire spectrum from relatively permissive environments found in Central Command’s area of operations to more contested scenarios found in the Pacific Command, Marosko said.

For example, the F-35A could be used to destroy enemy air defenses to create pockets of permissive airspace in which fourth-generation aircraft can operate, he said.

Venable said most of the current F-35A pilots have only 100 to 300 hours of flight time on the aircraft, which isn’t much. “These guys aren’t getting out and standing their airplane on its tail. They’re not understanding the nuances and they really need to be given that opportunity with a lot of flying time to go out there and max fly the airplane.”

Harrigian said: “There is more work that needs to be done with this. … When you give this stuff to airmen: get out of the way. They’ve got it.”

Venable said: “This airplane is not out of the woods. It still has some growing to do and the growing pains are still going to be with us for awhile.”

When the Defense Department decided to do concurrent development, it chose a path of greater risk, he said. He pushed back at the notion that concurrency was acquisition malpractice, although there were lessons to be learned from the program’s mistakes...."

Source: http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/ ... itics.aspx
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7676
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post18 Aug 2016, 22:50

The F-35A “allows you to understand where you need to be in the next three to five minutes, where you need to move assets, and to have that battlefield situational awareness to make decisions quicker and better than we could in any other legacy airplane. And that is fundamental to the platform and what it brings to the fight,”

Talk about shaping the battlespace in your favor. First I've heard of the SA advantage quantified this way. Not fair! LOL
Last edited by popcorn on 18 Aug 2016, 23:58, edited 1 time in total.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4183
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post18 Aug 2016, 23:24

popcorn wrote:The F-35A “allows you to understand where you need to be in the next three to five minutes, where you need to move assets, and to have that battlefield situational awareness to make decisions quicker and better than we could in any other legacy airplane. And that is fundamental to the platform and what it brings to the fight,”

Talk about shaping the battlespace in you favor. First I've heard of the SA advantage quantified this way. Not fair! LOL

And that was coming from an F-22 pilot.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1201
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post26 Aug 2016, 06:18

Now to add to our Iranian F-4 story, and try to get folks to understand "dogfighting" in the 5th Gen world, the following report.

Read the entire story at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/worl ... /89258646/

Jim Michaels, USA TODAY 1:09 p.m. EDT August 25, 2016
"Two American fighter pilots who intercepted Syrian combat jets over northern Syria last week said they came within 2,000 feet of the planes without the Syrians aware they were being shadowed...
The Pentagon warned Syria that American forces were authorized to take action to defend its troops. Syrian aircraft haven’t dropped bombs in the area since then, ...
“I followed him around for all three of his loops,” one of the American pilots, a 38-year-old Air Force major, told USA TODAY Wednesday in the first detailed account of the incident. “He didn’t appear to have any idea I was there.”...
“The behavior stopped,” said Brig. Gen. Charles Corcoran, commander of the 380th Air Expeditionary Wing, which conducts airstrikes in Iraq and Syria from an undisclosed location in this region. “We made our point.”...

Friday's incident, as described by commanders here, began in the afternoon, when a Syrian aircraft was spotted entering the airspace around Hasakah, and the pair of F-22s, already in the area, raced toward them.
The captain said he quickly got on a common radio frequency in an effort to reach the Syrian aircraft, asking the pilot to identify himself and state his intentions. There was no response.
U.S. commanders also contacted the Russians by phone to seek information, but the Russians were unaware of the Syrian action.
At that point the only way to get information was to have the American pilots approach the Syrian planes, Su-24 Fencers, to determine if they were armed or dropping bombs.
The American pilots asked permission to get closer to the Syrian aircraft to determine if they were carrying weapons on their wings or appeared to be attacking ground targets. Normally pilots are under orders to keep their distance from Russian or Syrian planes to avoid a miscalculation.
Permission was granted. One of the F-22s watched as the other maneuvered behind the Syrian aircraft to get a closer look. After about 15 minutes, the Syrian jet left the area, apparently unaware it was being followed.
Moments later a second Syrian jet entered the airspace. The American pilots repeated the sequence. Neither of the Syrian planes appeared to be carrying weapons, the pilots said.
... The F-22 is a stealth aircraft, and pilots are trained to avoid being seen by their adversaries. Commanders are considering more overt tactics in the future to send a message to the Syrians.
“From now on if it happens, it’s get out to where they can visually see us,” Corcoran said.
In the air command center in Qatar, which oversees air operations in the Middle East, Maj. Gen. Jay Silveria said he was prepared to order the pilots to down the Syrian aircraft if they threatened coalition forces. “I wouldn’t have hesitated,” he said. "
All I needed at that point to shoot them down was a report from the ground that they were being attacked,” Silveria said. “We were in a perfect position to execute that with some pretty advanced weaponry.”


There was no indication that the F-22s pulled 9 G's or used TV to get nose on target. ALTHOUGH I'm sure they could have if needed... it just wasn't needed ... Welcome to 21st century WVR (<2,000 ft) dogfighting.

BP
Offline

les_paul59

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 330
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2016, 05:57

Unread post26 Aug 2016, 16:49

The raptor is beyond scary, shadowing a plane at that range with the enemy having no idea he's there, I guess the gun on the f-35 can become rather relevant if 5th gen is sneaking up on jets at that type of range.
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2885
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post26 Aug 2016, 18:23

les_paul59 wrote:The raptor is beyond scary, shadowing a plane at that range with the enemy having no idea he's there, I guess the gun on the f-35 can become rather relevant if 5th gen is sneaking up on jets at that type of range.


....hmmm....surgical precision.....humane..... if the F-35B/C is closing to that range, then can a ballistic firing control program (using sensor merge) precisely place a 0.010 sec./ 33rd burst (might be over-kill) of 25mm into the enema jet engine turbine. Insuring that 6 2/3 ("Ace"/ flight) enemas have an exhilarating descent in their vehicle escape system????....hmmmm.... :wink:


...a bit different than hosing from the A-10, as I have seen and heard them do on many occasions... :D
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2033
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post26 Aug 2016, 18:36

blindpilot wrote:There was no indication that the F-22s pulled 9 G's or used TV to get nose on target. ALTHOUGH I'm sure they could have if needed... it just wasn't needed ... Welcome to 21st century WVR (<2,000 ft) dogfighting.

BP


Whenever I hear reports like these, I tend to ask myself, is maneuverability still relevant in a 5th generation fight. But then I remember what F-22 and F-35 test pilot Tom Morganfeld had to say about it. Safe to say he knows more about those planes than any of us here.



Question at 50:37 of the video

Tom Morganfeld wrote:the question was, is maneuverability still important? I dont know of a fighter where maneuverability wasn't important, but as weapons systems improve it becomes less and less...(proceeds to tell a story) maneuverability is important, if you get a decent weapons system it takes away the need for maneuverability to a certain extent but if you want an air to air airplane, it has to be able to turn and point its nose
PreviousNext

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests