Acceleration

[playloud]

Hey QS, while this will vary with altitude and conditions, have your former colleagues driving Lightnings stated how fast the jet will true out at, at max Mil power setting?

More of a curiosity question than anything. And, of course, may be privileged info...

"In full war equipment operates F-35 effortlessly 10,000 to 15,000 feet higher than our F-16 can, without using afterburner. The speed in 'cruises' is without further 50 to 80 knots higher. " I think it was Dobly that said that. I only have it credited as "Norwegian test pilot"

Major Morten “Dolby” Hanche

https://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampf ... elt-annet/

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

Thought so, thanks for the confirmation.

[quicksilver]

Hey QS, while this will vary with altitude and conditions, have your former colleagues driving Lightnings stated how fast the jet will true out at, at max Mil power setting?

More of a curiosity question than anything. And, of course, may be privileged info...

No. Details generally not public. I don’t ask; they don’t offer.

[quicksilver]

LtCol Hank Griffiths, who commanded the test squadron at EDW some years back said this on the matter —

“What we can do in our airplane is get above the Mach with afterburner, and once you get it going ... you can definitely pull the throttle back quite a bit and still maintain supersonic, so technically you're pretty much at very, very min[imum] afterburner while you're cruising," Griffiths said. "So it really does have very good acceleration capabilities...”

DT test guy...not prone to spin or hyperbole. Just the facts.

[steve2267]

LtCol Hank Griffiths, who commanded the test squadron at EDW some years back said this on the matter —

“What we can do in our airplane is get above the Mach with afterburner, and once you get it going ... you can definitely pull the throttle back quite a bit and still maintain supersonic, so technically you're pretty much at very, very min[imum] afterburner while you're cruising," Griffiths said. "So it really does have very good acceleration capabilities...”

DT test guy...not prone to spin or hyperbole. Just the facts.

Based on your knowledge and experience, wouldn't "very very min[imum] afterburner" still drink fuel at a rather prodigious rate? (Though far less than max burner.) I am guessing the motor is still burning a substantial amount of fuel more than max Mil. But what does this piston popper know?

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

Of course. Using min burner to hold 1.2M vs Mil power to hold .99M is going to be in the ballpark of 2-3 times the fuel flow. Actual Drag may not be as high at 1.2M as would be expected relative to .99M. .99M is near maximum trans-sonic wave drag while 1.2M is usually well on the way back down to the steady supersonic condition. 300% fuel flow for 120% speed? no one is going to think that's a good plan. Even moreso that 0.99M is probably 150% fuel flow compared to 0.93-0.95. Max R and Max Mil can be very different fuel flows for a small change in speed.

[quicksilver]

LtCol Hank Griffiths, who commanded the test squadron at EDW some years back said this on the matter —

“What we can do in our airplane is get above the Mach with afterburner, and once you get it going ... you can definitely pull the throttle back quite a bit and still maintain supersonic, so technically you're pretty much at very, very min[imum] afterburner while you're cruising," Griffiths said. "So it really does have very good acceleration capabilities...”

DT test guy...not prone to spin or hyperbole. Just the facts.

Based on your knowledge and experience, wouldn't "very very min[imum] afterburner" still drink fuel at a rather prodigious rate? (Though far less than max burner.) I am guessing the motor is still burning a substantial amount of fuel more than max Mil. But what does this piston popper know?

Jets burn prodigious amounts of JP in mil — F-22 included. Operationally, sometimes you just need the speed...

[Corsair1963]

It will be interesting to see how the XA100 or XA101 would change the above debate???

[viper12]

Of course. Using min burner to hold 1.2M vs Mil power to hold .99M is going to be in the ballpark of 2-3 times the fuel flow.

Isn't that figure a bit high ? The Finnish specs sheet gave around 24.4K lb/h for mil power and some 81K lb/h in afterburner for the F-35A, so in the worst case scenario, minimum afterburner would be close to full afterburner, at 73.2 lb/h or so.

[spazsinbad]

Hey QS, while this will vary with altitude and conditions, have your former colleagues driving Lightnings stated how fast the jet will true out at, at max Mil power setting?

More of a curiosity question than anything. And, of course, may be privileged info...

"In full war equipment operates F-35 effortlessly 10,000 to 15,000 feet higher than our F-16 can, without using afterburner. The speed in 'cruises' is without further 50 to 80 knots higher. " I think it was Dobly that said that. I only have it credited as "Norwegian test pilot"

Major Morten “Dolby” Hanche

https://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampf ... elt-annet/

English Transration Reference here: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=27497&p=295008&hilit=Hanche+right+stuff#p295008

Earlier 'gabriele' posted the original link: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186&p=289639&hilit=Hanche+right+stuff#p289639

part from Google Transrate: "...In full war equipment operates F-35 effortlessly 10,000 to 15,000 feet higher than our F-16 can, without using afterburner. The speed in 'cruises' is without further 50 to 80 knots higher. In the F-16, I must use afterburner and take running speed before a missile shot. F-35 "cruiser" both faster and higher. Therefore, I am ready to shoot far anytime.

F-35 also has more fuel than we are accustomed to, it carries the load inside and is not as dependent on afterburner. Therefore we are left with more range than the F-16 and similar aircraft can achieve. "Combat radius" for the F-35 is between 30% and 70% longer than we get with the F-16! The extra range comes in handy in our elongated country. Range may alternatively be replaced in endurance over a given area...."

[doge]

Mr.Billie Frynn emphasized the speed and agility of the F-35. wow
https://twitter.com/lmnews/status/1256221847873601543 (This is a Lockheed Martin account.)

"One of the game changing capabilities of the F-35 is speed and agility.

Make no mistake, the F-35 can fly and fight in supersonic mode without any degradation to the aircraft's integrity.

As proven in combat, the F-35 is the world's most advanced fighter."

-BILLIE FLYNN F-35 Test Pilot

Mr. Billie Frynn Tweet for the LM's Image.
https://twitter.com/billieflynn/status/ ... 3084741633

@ billieflynn May 1
Reply-to: Atto Lmnews 's
My statement is accurate.

[doge]

Mr. Billie Flynn says the F-35 is faster than the Legacy Fighters. wow.
https://twitter.com/billieflynn/status/ ... 3776226316

Billie Flynn@billieflynn
November 25, 2021
Can’t go that fast in @BoeingDefense #SuperHornet or #Gripen in a combat configuration with bombs, missiles and fuel tanks loaded on those jets. @thef35 will leave them in the dust. Hard to imagine @RCAF_ARC buying a new fighter that is slower and less maneuverable than #F35.

Video
https://twitter.com/LMCanadaNews/status ... 7413886977

Lockheed Martin Canada@LMCanadaNews
November 25, 2021
The F-35’s speed is unique in that it can reach its Mach 1.6 limit while fully-loaded and retaining its #stealth configuration. Learn more from former #F35 test pilot @billieflynn below.

BILLIE FLYNN FORMER F-35 TEST PILOT
One of the ways we measure an aircraft, or always have measured it is, how fast can it go? What's the high-end speed of an aircraft?
Going super-sonic means going faster than the speed of sound, faster than Mach 1.0.
What distinguishes an F-35 from legacy fighters is that we can fly to our speed limit - 1.6, in a combat configuration with our bombs and missiles on the inside and legacy fighters cannot.
So, I flew F-4s and F-18s and F-16s and Eurofighter Typhoons. That's more than Mach 2 in an F-4 and an F-16, 1.9 Mach in a Eurofighter Typhoon, but in each of those cases those were stripped down aircraft like you would see at an airshow.
And, that means that you could fly an airshow with it or fly a training mission once and awhile, but you could never go to I combat with that configuration You wouldn't have the bombs or missiles and you wouldn't have the fuel to go far enough.
An F-35 will fly at 1.6 Mach. in peacetime and in combat, because in combat those bombs and the missiles are inside the weapons bays of that airplane completely closed up in a stealth configuration.
So, those examples of fast jets are great when we're talking about how fast our car would go on an autobahn or on a highway but that has no application in combat.
The F-35's combat capability of 1.6 Mach, of 700 Knots, of 1,400 kilometers per hour, is every single day and no legacy fighter can match that.

[spazsinbad]

Have Uboobed the tWATTed video immediately above here:
F-35’s speed is unique in that it can reach its Mach 1.6 limit while fully loaded by LM Billie Flynn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci2DjuQY760

[doge]

Shockingly, the F-35 outperforms the F-22 in acceleration of the area up to Mach 1, says Eielson Commander Col. David Berkland. (What!?!?!? ) I had assumed that the F-35 was inferior to the F-22 in all areas of maneuverability...(Betrayed! )
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimclash/2 ... c74c752cb5

Col. Berkland, Keeper Of F-35s At Eielson AFB, On Russia, Fear, More
Mar 22, 2022 Jim Clash
Eielson Air Force Base, just below the Arctic Circle near Fairbanks, Alaska, is one of the more remote U.S. military operations. Conditions are harsh up there, especially in winter, when temperatures can plummet to - 40 F, and where darkness can take up more than 20 of the 24 hours in a day. It is also quite close to Russia, just across the Bering Strait, making it an important and strategic base for U.S. interests.
I visited Alaska last week to fly in the backseat of an F-16D, and to immerse myself in Eielson’s unique Arctic Survival School. As part of my itinerary, I sat down with Col. David Berkland, Commander of the 354th Fighter Wing. Basically, he runs the show at Eielson, responsible for some 3,ooo airmen and airwomen, plus a number of fighter jets including 49 new F-35s and 18 F-16s. Berkland, 47, an F-35 and F-16 pilot himself, is a 22-year Air Force veteran with several combat tours under his belt, including Afghanistan. Following are edited excerpts from a longer conversation.

Jim Clash: You’ve flown the fourth-generation F-16 and the new fifth-generation F-35. What are the main differences between them? Also, how does the fifth-generation F-22 fit in?
Col. David Berkland: In many ways, the F-16 and F-35 are similar. They are both single-engine, single-seat, multi-role Lockheed Martin products, with side-stick controls. The F-16 is hard to beat as you saw today on your own flight. It’s a muscle car, like a Dodge Viper. It’s got the thrust, turns great, is versatile in terms of the missions it can do. The F-35, on the other hand, is more like a very lethal Tesla. It has stealth characteristics as well as sensor fusion. In that F-16 today, your pilot was flipping through different displays to combine information for three-dimensional situational awareness. The F-35 lays all of that information over top of one display, fusing it.

The F-35 also has really good acceleration. The engine is a beast. If you start at say, 200 knots, the F-16 and F-35 side-by-side using full afterburners, the F-35 will reach Mach 1 faster. It will also beat an F-22 to Mach 1.

But at Mach 1, the F-22 pushes faster to Mach 2, and will overtake the F-35. The F-35 was not built to be strictly an air-dominance aircraft. The F-16 will also overtake the F-35 between Mach 1 and Mach 2. The F-35 actually maxes out at about Mach 1.7, fast enough to get the job done. Think of the F-35 as the quarterback in an air combat fight with several other planes because of its stealth and sensor-fusion capabilities.

Clash: Eielson is just across the Bering Strait from Siberia. With the current Ukraine situation, are you on any heightened level of readiness?
Berkland: To be honest, it’s business as usual. We’re always ready to go. And because of our strategic location here in Alaska, we can get into the Pacific or Europe or anywhere in the northern hemisphere in a single-fighter sortie, using air-fueling. Billy Mitchell in the 1930s said, “Whoever holds Alaska holds the world.” That remains true today. That’s why we’ve got the F-35s here. The world map is very deceptive. We are closer to Beijing than Hawaii is to Beijing. Alaska is actually further west than Hawaii. We can also take the polar route. Our base is named after Ben Eielson, who was first to fly from North America to Europe over the North Pole. [Charles] Lindbergh took the easy route across the Atlantic, Eielson took the north route out of Barrow and landed in Spitzbergen, Norway.

Clash: What are some challenges you face up here in the arctic versus USAF bases in more forgiving climes?
Berkland: The challenges run the gamut to keep the installation and infrastructure sound. Our big thunder-dome hangar was started in 1952, seven years before Alaska became a state. You feel the extreme cold up here, and you have to dress carefully for it. Being in charge of all of the airmen and their families is always a challenge of extremes, darkness and cold, and it’s always on my mind. On Dec. 21, we get three hours and 41 minutes of daylight, and that light just skims the Delta range, and not like the sun is really up. It’s physical as well as psychological. Look at how much Vitamin D you don’t get. Look at your circadian rhythms - they’re not happening. I’ll be honest, before my first winter here, I scoffed at how difficult I had heard it would be. But in the middle of December, I’m laying in bed eating carbs, didn’t want to get up. So I got some “happy” lamps and started downing Vitamin D. In the summer, on the other hand, the sun never really goes down. Again, that affects circadian rhythms. You black out your windows, mow the fast-growing grass. The mosquitos come in waves. The initial wave is May and June, and they are really big, slow and dumb. But later in the summer, they evolve into a smaller, faster, more intelligent brand [laughs].

Clash: I know you’ve seen combat in an F-16 over Afghanistan. Any close calls you want to mention?
Berkland: I’ve had countless close calls in my 3,000 hours in the F-16 and hundreds of hours in the F-35. Most of those are when you’re younger and learning the importance of flight discipline, meticulous planning, when flying as aggressors. I have employed 20-millimeter machine gun fire just 30 meters away from our friendlies from a mile out. The friendlies were being engaged by the enemy team, and they needed my gun to help them out. Now that’s a close call.

Clash: How do you deal with fear, and what are you afraid of?
Berkland: As an American fighter pilot, I don’t fear anything. I do have concerns. I tell my kids not to be afraid of anything, either. If you’re nervous about something, you need to prepare, have a plan. Be ready to be flexible, too, because the enemy gets a vote and things will often change. And then rely on your teammates. I always fly with a wingman. I’ve been a fighter pilot in the Air Force for 22 years, and have never gone anywhere without one.

That is an incredible and shocking fact for many people... The F-35 is faster than the F-16 and F-22 in the up to Mach 1 area ...To me that seems to be quite an Acceleration...

Because the F-16 and F-22 are treated on the web as the kings of acceleration. Those 2 are at the top near the No.1 acceleration ranking.

On the other hand, people on the web say that the F-35 accelerates slowly, bottom of the acceleration rankings.

But now, a great reversal has occurred in this racing game that no one expected, and the F-35 has suddenly jumped to the Top No.1 position in the acceleration ranking !!!!!!! (Oh My God!!!!!!!!!!! ) Such Cinderella story races are rarely seen !!!! (Long serialization... )

[ricnunes]

Excellent find doge!