F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 13:21
by gc
Reading the most recent issue of Combat Aircraft. The results of this air to air and ground strafe competition is surprising to say the least. Participating aircrafts are the F-15C, F-16, F-35A and A-10C.

Air to air scenario comprised of a two shot radar missile kill scenario and guns only BFM event. The F-35s participated with radar reflectors to give the vipers and eagle any chance. One would have expected the Lightning to dominate the radar missile fight and the viper to dominate the guns fight. But lo and behold, it was the opposite.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 13:50
by spazsinbad
Four Page PDF from Combat Aircraft Mag'n Aug 2019 of 'Desert Storm' about HABOOB HAVOC by Joe Copalman is attached.

& earlier on da Picha thred: download/file.php?id=30789

viewtopic.php?f=63&t=54256&p=423148&hilit=renbarger#p423148

Image

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 14:46
by gc
Thanks Spaz for the article.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 16:16
by marsavian
Isn't the most important takeaway is that the supposedly inaccurate F-35A gun shot down another fighter ;).

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 16:28
by sferrin
HaboobHavocAfterTheDustSettled.gif


"OH MAH GAWD SEE F-35 GETS SHOT DOWN BY F-16!!!!!"

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 16:28
by SpudmanWP
I am sure the "devil's in the details"....
--radar reflectors
--BFM setup
--HOBS restrictions
--etc

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 17:13
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:I am sure the "devil's in the details"....
--radar reflectors
--BFM setup
--HOBS restrictions
--etc


How often do the usual suspects worry about little things like that?

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 17:17
by marsavian
4/1 for the F-15C, go F-15EX !! ;)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 17:26
by zero-one
I noticed that the highest kill ratio seems to be a low 4:1 which is close to the early Vietnam era kill ratio of 3:1 which was considered Abysmal.

Why?
Are these exercises the sort where everything is set up to be as "fair" as possible.
-Radar reflectors
-Neutral merge set ups
-1 v 1, 2 v 2, 4 v 4 etc

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 17:35
by outlaw162
Isn't the most important takeaway is that the supposedly inaccurate F-35A gun shot down another fighter


Minor technicality, but this says nothing about the 'accuracy' of the actual gun. To determine that you would have to fire it. :shock:

(kill was probably determined either by gun camera assessment or some fancy TACTS pod datalink assessment, or both)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 17:54
by SpudmanWP
outlaw162 wrote:To determine that you would have to fire it. :shock:

Live-Fire ground targets were part of the exercise so it's accuracy is easily demonstrated.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 18:19
by outlaw162
so it's accuracy is easily demonstrated....


....to have been somewhat less than that of the A-10C. :D

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 18:29
by doge
I tried to search for "Lt Col. Daniel ‘Chip’n ’Daehler". 8) https://www.944fw.afrc.af.mil/News/Arti ... milestone/
He is a former F-16 pilot, and the F-35 boarding history seems to be the third year.
It's very very amazing to "Kill in only 34 seconds" the Dogfight king F-16. :applause:

I try to think about this in various ways. 8)
The impression of both fighter I know is...
    ・Both 9G.
    ・Acceleration is about the same.
    ・The turn is better with F-16.
    ・Low speed maneuverability is better with the F-35.
    ・Cockpit visibility is better with F-16.
What is the factor that divided the victory and defeat? I suppose.
    ・Enemy mistakes?
    ・F-35 is have, but F-16 is not have, Thanks to the slow maneuverability?
    ・Lt Col. Daniel ‘Chip’n ’Daehler was the crack top special Ace pilot?
    etc...
I do not know variously, Anyway...Great Excellent!!! :applause:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 18:42
by sprstdlyscottsmn
outlaw162 wrote:
so it's accuracy is easily demonstrated....


....to have been somewhat less than that of the A-10C. :D

The GAU-8 is a laser beam while the M-61 is a shotgun. I don;t know what the dispersion is of the GAU-22.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 19:39
by wrightwing
doge wrote:


I try to think about this in various ways. 8)
The impression of both fighter I know is...
    ・Both 9G.
    ・Acceleration is about the same.
    ・The turn is better with F-16.
    ・Low speed maneuverability is better with the F-35.
    ・Cockpit visibility is better with F-16.
What is the factor that divided the victory and defeat?


The only configuration where an F-16 has kinematic parity, is in an airshow configuration. Put any weapons/pods/EFTs on the F-16, and the F-35 will out accelerate, as well as enjoy better STR/ITR. The cockpit visibility is better in an F-16, but DAS provides better SA than Mk1 eyeballs.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 19:42
by SpudmanWP
"Maybe" wingtip AIM-9X but certainly nothing pylon mounted or CFTs.

I'd bet the F-35 was not allowed to have the 9X either.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 19:47
by sferrin
outlaw162 wrote:
so it's accuracy is easily demonstrated....


....to have been somewhat less than that of the A-10C. :D


How many planes did the A-10 shoot with it's gun? :lmao:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:01
by outlaw162
The GAU-8 is a laser beam while the M-61 is a shotgun.


There was minimal dispersion with the M-61 on a stable platform like the A-7 or F-105. Even the SUU-23 pod would fire a fairly concentrated burst if mounted properly....and it helped if it was pointed in the right direction. :D

The GAU-22 has half the ROF of the M-61, so even with minimal dispersion, you get half the rounds out toward the target over the same firing period, albeit bigger, harder hitting rounds. Not so much a factor A/G as it is A/A.

That 34 seconds is impressive, but how soon we forget 40 second Boyd. That was 60 years ago and he started with his opponent 1000 feet behind him.

So we've dropped 6 seconds in 60 years as a measure of aerial gun employment progress.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:11
by f-16adf
Big question is: Did the F-16's have tanks on? Willing to bet they did. Unless someone has a few pics from the event showing otherwise-




Also, F-15C's out of JRB NO aka "JZ" fight with VFA-204 Hornets from time to time. They know the slow speed alpha fight well.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:15
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Ah, but have they ever fought a Hornet "with four engines"?

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:29
by hythelday
Quickest radar kill means little, but the fact that Eagles either scored more kills or died less isn't something to write home about for the F-35 drivers, unless there was some major disproportion regarding sorties flown. F-35 theoretically has heaps of SA advantage, and is supposedly a "Hornet with four engines" and "turns like a snowboard in powder snow" but still couldn't match F-15 in BFM? Seems strange given that in both "Heritage reports" F-15C pilots favored Eagle only in perch setup but overwhelmingly voted F-35A better at "close range".

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:35
by f-16adf
JZ guys fight the Navy Aggressor Hornets aka VFA-204, both are based in JRB New Orleans. As I said in the prior post, they aren't ignorant of the high AOA fight. Ultimately, it's the quality of the pilot.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:41
by spazsinbad
"A 20mm round from the M61 Vulcan 20mm cannon of this 310th FS ‘Tophats’ F-16D streaks past the canopy
during a low-angle strafe pass." Photo from four page PDF of article about 'HABOOB HAVOC' on previous page.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:53
by f-16adf
And their jets are pretty old:


the FY 78 jet didn't even have all the front end mods.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:57
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Doesn't say what they got 4:1 against. Article says they went up to a predetermined point and "fought whatever was there" and that A-10s also participated. No AIM-9s at all. They wanted the event to be "easy and fun", this is not a Red Flag style competition.

Edit* it could be that unit smoked everything that wasn't an F-35 and lost against every F-35 they were up against. We don't know.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 20:59
by spazsinbad
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Doesn't say what they got 4:1 against. Article says they went up to a predetermined point and "fought whatever was there" and that A-10s also participated. No AIM-9s at all. They wanted the event to be "easy and fun", this is not a Red Flag style competition.
Desert Storm [Haboob Havoc]
August 2019 Joe Copalman

"...organizers suggested those with minimal experience in dissimilar air combat training (DACT) be selected to utilize the competition as a training opportunity as well.

Head-to-head
The competition consisted of an air-to-air event, characterized by one-on-one dissimilar engagements, and an air-to-ground event that involved high-angle strafe and low-angle strafe on the manned ranges at the Goldwater Range. For the air air-to-air event, the focus was on dissimilar basic fighter maneuvering (BFM). Explaining how these match-ups worked, Maj Alex ‘Leeroy’ Esson, 56th FW weapons officer and exercise organizer told Combat Aircraft, ‘What we did was have two points that were 10-15 miles away from each other, so you show up at that point and you both turn in, and then you end up fighting whatever you get across from you. The whole idea was [to see] what is that other aircraft? Move in for a visual, decide what your advantages are, and see who could take better advantage of those.’ All aircraft types taking part in ‘Haboob Havoc’ engaged in the BFM engagements — even the A-10s.

The two possible means of achieving victory in the air-to-air engagement were either a two-shot radar missile ‘kill’ or a guns ‘kill.’ Though all aircraft had the capability to carry the AIM-9 Sidewinder infra-red-guided missile, Esson deliberately excluded it as an option during ‘Haboob Havoc 2019’. ‘I took Sidewinders out of it because then all the units who came in would have had to bring flares, which is annoying because flying over the continental US, you need to get permission for ordnance transfers. The whole point of the competition was to make it easy and fun. The other reason I did that is because it makes the fights a little bit more pure BFM. If you’re going to be fighting a Sidewinder that has a really high off-boresight capability, you have to fight a very different fight, and it’s not quite the raging BFM that would happen from only radar missiles and guns.’..."

Source: Combat Aircraft Magazine August 2019 Volume 20 Number 8

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 21:10
by outlaw162
JZ guys fight the Navy Aggressor Hornets aka VFA-204, both are based in JRB New Orleans. As I said in the prior post, they aren't ignorant of the high AOA fight. Ultimately, it's the quality of the pilot.


These guys made their air-to-air reputation starting way back in their F-100 days. They were good....but back then they were not the Bayou Militia....they were the Coonass Militia.

Did the Eagles strafe? :shock:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 21:19
by spazsinbad
outlaw162 wrote:
JZ guys fight the Navy Aggressor Hornets aka VFA-204, both are based in JRB New Orleans. As I said in the prior post, they aren't ignorant of the high AOA fight. Ultimately, it's the quality of the pilot.

These guys made their air-to-air reputation starting way back in their F-100 days. They were good....but back then they were not the Bayou Militia....they were the Coonass Militia.
Did the Eagles strafe? :shock:

Quote from reading the four page PDF arstickle available:
"...‘Haboob Havoc’, a gunnery competition named after Arizona’s summer dust storms and hosted by the 56th Fighter Wing at Luke AFB just outside Phoenix, is one of the few hold-outs when it comes to such events. Initially established in December 2011 by then-56th FW commanding officer Brig Gen J. D. Harris, ‘Haboob Havoc’ brings US Air Force fighter squadrons together for several days of competition in the form of one-on-one dogfighting and air-to-ground gunnery over the Barry M. Goldwater Range, as well as a golf competition and a hangar party....

...one F-15C pilot raised eyebrows by placing in the top three in high-angle strafe (the F-15s did not fly the low-angle strafe). As Esson recounted, ‘They had one pilot from the Louisiana Air National Guard, and they’re a really pushed-up unit. Most C-model units don’t strafe a lot, but they do it just to make sure their guns are actually working. They had one guy who had been a Strike Eagle pilot who switched over to the C-models, and he had the third best pass of the entire competition.’..."

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 21:22
by sprstdlyscottsmn
outlaw162 wrote:Did the Eagles strafe? :shock:

An F-15C driver who used to fly F-15Es even took third in the high angle strafe.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 21:29
by outlaw162
A closet air-to-ground guy. :D

Low angle strafe is tough for an aircraft whose gun actually points up slightly. I 'spect their low angle strafe (had they) scores would have been lower than their golf scores.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 21:35
by f-16adf
Yes!!!

The Coonass Militia flying the legendary F-4C Phantom II.

I think they dropped the name in the very early 1990's or so.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 15 Jul 2019, 22:21
by outlaw162
I had a couple of La Guard Hun students at Tucson. I 'spect they also won the hangar party. :mrgreen:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 00:42
by outlaw162
it could be that unit (La Guard Eagles) smoked everything that wasn't an F-35 and lost against every F-35 they were up against. We don't know.


How many planes did the A-10 shoot with it's gun? :lmao:


If the F-35s won every fight against the Eagles, and didn't win highest kill ratio, that means they had a number of losses to the other involved aircraft....possibly the lowly A-10s....

How embarrassing.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 00:53
by SpudmanWP
Or, based on a scripted setup (BFM) with additional artificial restrictions (radar reflectors, No over-the-shoulder HOBS, No 9x, etc) the F-35 was not allowed to play to it's strengths.

Just ask Raptor pilots what that feels like.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 00:58
by outlaw162
They wanted the event to be "easy and fun", this is not a Red Flag style competition.


Enjoy the fun, I'm sure everyone would prefer being in the F-35 for real, but fun these days is at a premium. :D

edit: Actually from what I gather, BFM is one of the F-35 strengths. :shock:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 03:38
by f-15c85-0114
Who is F-15C opponent?

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 03:44
by spazsinbad
f-15c85-0114 wrote:Who is F-15C opponent?
"...‘What we did was have two points that were 10-15 miles away from each other, so you show up at that point and you both turn in, and then you end up fighting whatever you get across from you. The whole idea was [to see] what is that other aircraft? Move in for a visual, decide what your advantages are, and see who could take better advantage of those.’ All aircraft types taking part in ‘Haboob Havoc’ engaged in the BFM engagements — even the A-10s.…"

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 10:11
by zero-one
hythelday wrote:Quickest radar kill means little,

I'm curious as to why?

hythelday wrote: "turns like a snowboard in powder snow"

This was specifically used to describe the C model

hythelday wrote: "Heritage reports" F-15C pilots favored Eagle only in perch setup but overwhelmingly voted F-35A better at "close range".

Remember those F-15s were said to be piloted by the air-air specialists of the Louisiana ANG. Biggest factor in BFM is the man in the box

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 13:21
by sferrin
outlaw162 wrote:If the F-35s won every fight against the Eagles


Did they?

outlaw162 wrote:and didn't win highest kill ratio, that means they had a number of losses to the other involved aircraft....possibly the lowly A-10s....

How embarrassing.


If, and, if, and, and, and. . . . We both know if the A-10 gunned down an F-35 the news would be around the world already and the usual suspects would be crowing about it.


I would also like to know if they gimped the F-35 just to give everybody else a chance.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 14:30
by sprstdlyscottsmn
of course they gimped it.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 14:57
by outlaw162
Back in the day, occasionally when we'd fight the Eagles with our lesser craft, we'd do one engagement of 'battle-damage' BFM (F-15 pulled one engine to idle to simulate damage) so we could have some chance of enjoying our cold beer at the end of the day.

Maybe they had the F-35s fight in idle. :doh:

These set-ups were ideal for pilot enjoyment, going head to head from 10 miles for some good old fashion guns-only BFM against an 'unknown' type. I'd have loved to have been in any of the four types involved. A-10 is a pretty good BFMer, I wouldn't discount their performance in this scenario. It doesn't get any better for morale all the way around, win or lose. It was a party.

(I'm surprised that apparently the Tucson Guard wasn't invited.)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 15:11
by optimist
It's a funny old world, it wasn't that long ago that the Indian SU and migs were flogging the F-15 in an exercise. They had to have the F-22. Now the f-15 is flogging everything and they have to have the f-15ex. Therefore it's true, the russian stuff from the 80"s rule the sky. :mrgreen:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 15:28
by sferrin
outlaw162 wrote:Back in the day, occasionally when we'd fight the Eagles with our lesser craft, we'd do one engagement of 'battle-damage' BFM (F-15 pulled one engine to idle to simulate damage) so we could have some chance of enjoying our cold beer at the end of the day.

Maybe they had the F-35s fight in idle. :doh:

These set-ups were ideal for pilot enjoyment, going head to head from 10 miles for some good old fashion guns-only BFM against an 'unknown' type. I'd have loved to have been in any of the four types involved. A-10 is a pretty good BFMer, I wouldn't discount their performance in this scenario. It doesn't get any better for morale all the way around, win or lose. It was a party.

(I'm surprised that apparently the Tucson Guard wasn't invited.)


There was at least one instance during Desert Storm where an A-10 pilot almost got to try out the gun on a Mig-29. But then an Eagle showed up. . .

(1:14)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 16 Jul 2019, 22:20
by doge
I found a photo of F-16C that participated in Haboob Havoc 2019. 8)
https://gramha.net/explore-hashtag/haboobhavoc
Most F-16C configurations carry a centerline tank, but non-tank F-16C can also be seen.
F-16D was carrying both wing tanks.
Regarding the under wing pylon and missiles, Most of the F-16s have pylons under the wing, but some have no pylons under the wing.
56396149_405763599979178_7219842734204559467_n.jpg

If...If F-35 Killed this lightweight loading F-16C, it's Greatest Excellent...! 8)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 02:54
by firebase99
Im a bit confused on most posters assessment of the F-35. IMO, it did well, as it was the jet that had the most handicaps, and arguably the most severe one - lenses. Like asking a sniper to drop the rifle and go get a knife and it STILL did well.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 03:01
by Corsair1963
firebase99 wrote:Im a bit confused on most posters assessment of the F-35. IMO, it did well, as it was the jet that had the most handicaps, and arguably the most severe one - lenses. Like asking a sniper to drop the rifle and go get a knife and it STILL did well.




Actually, Haboob Havoc was really more just for fun and to shake things up a bit. Hardly, a true test of the F-35's capabilities.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 03:22
by spazsinbad
With MINIMAL information I'm surprised that anyone can assess anything - apart from what was revealed opaquely. <sigh>

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 04:43
by steve2267
doge wrote:It's very very amazing to "Kill in only 34 seconds" the Dogfight king F-16. :applause:

outlaw162 wrote:That 34 seconds is impressive, but how soon we forget 40 second Boyd. That was 60 years ago and he started with his opponent 1000 feet behind him.

So we've dropped 6 seconds in 60 years as a measure of aerial gun employment progress.


If fight was on at 10 miles, a head on closure speed of 800mph won't close the distance in 34 seconds. A head on closure of 1000mph closes 10 miles in 36 seconds. Sounds like the F-35 driver face shot his 'ponent @ the merge. Maybe threw in some BFM-defeating maneuver to avoid getting two AMRAAMs in his own snot locker. DAS probably showed him where the Viper was and enabled him to set up for a passing snapshot. Wouldn't surprise me to learn some enterprising Lightning avionics software engineering wizard wrote some code to let HAL fly the Lightning on a very high deflection tracking pass...

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 05:50
by SpudmanWP
I wonder if "fastest twin AMRAAM launch" includes the time for the F-35 to open its doors?

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 13:05
by sferrin
steve2267 wrote:Wouldn't surprise me to learn some enterprising Lightning avionics software engineering wizard wrote some code to let HAL fly the Lightning on a very high deflection tracking pass...


Given the "code" has been around since the 80s. . . (I've posted video of the program several times on this site.)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 13:07
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:I wonder if "fastest twin AMRAAM launch" includes the time for the F-35 to open its doors?


It was performed by an F-16, not F-35.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 16:09
by SpudmanWP
I understand that.

My question was specifically if the time was calculated to include the door opening time on the F-35.

In other words, was the time calculated as "soonest to get a weapons lock" or "soonest to get one off the rail".

I could easily see, especially with the F-35 sporting the radar reflectors, that the F-35 actually got a radar lock first but had to wait a few seconds for either actual or simulated door opening in the time calculation. IF the door time was included in the calculation, I could see it causing the F-35's times to be longer than the F-16.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 18:39
by zero-one
steve2267 wrote:That 34 seconds is impressive, but how soon we forget 40 second Boyd. That was 60 years ago and he started with his opponent 1000 feet behind him.


But can Boyd do that against an F-16s?
I doubt it.
If it was set up as a guns only fight, then theres a chance that the F-16 was flying clean, guns only.

34 seconds against arguably the best gun platform ever made (if in a clean configuration)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 20:06
by outlaw162
But can Boyd do that against an F-16?


That would have been impossible. There were no F-16s then.

But the real question is, could the current garden variety F-35 guy do what Boyd did if he was flying an F-100 instead of F-35?

First he'd have to learn to fly the aircraft without the aid of software, unless you consider 'seat of the pants' as 'soft' 'wear'. :mrgreen:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 20:23
by spazsinbad
outlaw162 wrote:
But can Boyd do that against an F-16?

That would have been impossible. There were no F-16s then.
But the real question is, could the current garden variety F-35 guy do what Boyd did if he was flying an F-100 instead of F-35?
First he'd have to learn to fly the aircraft without the aid of software, unless you consider 'seat of the pants' as 'soft' 'wear'. :mrgreen:

8) :devil: IS that "'soft wear' pants" with or without SKID MARKS? :doh: :mrgreen:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 20:28
by sprstdlyscottsmn
That's the point though, isn't it. These SW jets (F-16 and on) are so easy to fly and fight that it softens up the learning curve.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 20:30
by sferrin
outlaw162 wrote:
But can Boyd do that against an F-16?


That would have been impossible. There were no F-16s then.

But the real question is, could the current garden variety F-35 guy do what Boyd did if he was flying an F-100 instead of F-35?

First he'd have to learn to fly the aircraft without the aid of software, unless you consider 'seat of the pants' as 'soft' 'wear'. :mrgreen:


What would you say was the peak, "OMG I'm so busy" fighter aircraft to fly? F-105? F-4? F-106

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 20:58
by outlaw162
For comparison:

F-105: very little except the 'pickle' button and the LIRI/LORO rack selection switches actually worked on the old derelicts I flew, so essentially very low workload in its twilight, just point it and drop the bomb. Workload A/A consisted of trying to avoid split flaps if you got slow and milked 'em down.

F-4: I'll probably take some flack for this, but coming from single-seaters, 'baby-sitting' the WSO was the highest workload, AKA the 'talking altimeter'. "Do you mind keeping quiet while I drop some manual bombs here, young man?" and the classic A/A maneuvering fallback, "Give me boresight and 10." Not that there's anything wrong with being a WSO, a number of ours became major airline captains....that's what they really wanted to do....fly the airplane.

To me the highest workloads in the ones I flew occurred prior to flight on the ground, in both the A-7 and F-16....getting everything set up properly so the airborne workload was minimized to some extent, although some of the airborne A-7 weapons switchology was a pain....F-16 was great in the air as long as you didn't try to move around too much.

Never flew the F-106.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 21:07
by spazsinbad
'outlaw162' said: "...F-16 was great in the air as long as you didn't try to move around too much...." Could you expand on this thought please? Thanks.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 21:14
by sprstdlyscottsmn
small cockpit I'm guessing. I mean, I know it's small I just assume that is what he meant.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 21:19
by outlaw162
I was 6'2", 185 lbs and the cockpit is relatively 'claustrophobic' for bigger folks. I guess if it's all you knew, you might consider it roomy enough. And it was certainly a small price to pay for the performance.

Probably actually 'roomy' compared to an A-4. :D

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 21:29
by spazsinbad
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:small cockpit I'm guessing. I mean, I know it's small I just assume that is what he meant.

8) Sit inside an A-4 cockpit (not the M model with an expanded canopy/cockpit) to experience 'CRAMPED' snug. :roll:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 21:36
by sprstdlyscottsmn
outlaw162 wrote:I was 6'2", 185 lbs and the cockpit is relatively 'claustrophobic' for bigger folks. I guess if it's all you knew, you might consider it roomy enough. And it was certainly a small price to pay for the performance.

Probably actually 'roomy' compared to an A-4. :D

I was 6'3 225lb when I sat in the cockpit. I felt like it was shrink wrapped around me.

I probably couldn't even squeeze into an A-4 Spaz.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 23:07
by spazsinbad
The RAN FAA probably had some 'as tall' guys in our A4Gs but I could not attest to their actual height/weight. The first CO of VF-805 had himself hoisted out of the cockpit to check that he could eject OK (we had steel capped boots for our toes.)
He was the tallest pilot ever probably to be shoehorned into an A4G so any lesser tall/less weighter mortals were OK. :devil:

Looks like Keef Meatball Johnson on our right is the tallest with the 'test' ejection new CO on the left just slightly less tall.
The TA4G with the squared off front windshield etc was only an approximation for the tighter fit of the A4G I reckon. :doh:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 23:12
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Well, he certainly looks like he COULD be a few inches of me either way.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2019, 23:21
by spazsinbad
One could do measurements from this info: I am THOMPSON at 6 foot/183 cm. Barrie Daly is in both OFS photos (he left the first OFS to go learn to be an Air Warfare Instructor in the UK with the RNFAA then came back to join No.3 OFS later.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 19 Jul 2019, 13:16
by mixelflick
Sat in an F-16 once, I'm 6"1" and 245lbs.

Not the biggest guy in the world, but it was claustrophobic as hell. Especially it seemed, if you have a good set of shoulders. Only thing worse was an MRI and "Mission To Mars" ride, at Disney.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 20 Jul 2019, 02:32
by geforcerfx
At an airshow when I was 16 the f-16 guys told me no, I already knew and was honestly just looking around the jet but one of the matinence guys wanted me to know for sure it wasn't happening and was a bit loud about it. I walked over to the F-15e from MTN home parked next to it, they weren't letting people get into the cockpit but they let me sit in the WSO seat since the F-16 guys were such dicks about it. The WSO seat didn't work great for me I was 6'4 and around 250-270 at 16(offensive line build) At the last airshow all the Jets were just look into the cockpit no entry.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 20 Jul 2019, 15:43
by jetblast16
cc952.jpg


:thumb:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 20 Jul 2019, 19:34
by sprstdlyscottsmn
An F-15 taxied by while I was sitting in the cockpit of the F-16. I was amazed at how far up I still had to look to see the pilot. Friggin Battlestar Galactica.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 21 Jul 2019, 12:50
by mixelflick
jetblast16 wrote:
cc952.jpg


:thumb:


50 years later, the F-15 is still a gorgeous bird.

The new F-15EX (if it comes to pass) will undoubtedly have more powerful motors, but then again I'm sure it'll be heavier too. There's always that weight creep..

I know, I know. "New" and F-15 don't belong in the same sentence. I sure as hell hope they come to their senses and just build more F-35's. Why the USAF continues to make major errors in judgment isn't clear. Gates is gone. Shannahan is gone. Building "new" F-15's seems as ridiculous as building up-rated Flankers and Mig-35's.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 21 Jul 2019, 15:39
by jetblast16
Friggin Battlestar Galactica.


They don't call it the Starship for nothing :wink:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 21 Jul 2019, 15:44
by jetblast16
f-15-eagle-going-vertical-erik-simonsen.jpg


50 years later, the F-15 is still a gorgeous bird.


Indeed:)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 21 Jul 2019, 15:54
by sferrin
jetblast16 wrote:
Friggin Battlestar Galactica.


They don't call it the Starship for nothing :wink:



Who calls it that?

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 21 Jul 2019, 18:47
by SpudmanWP
Amazon...

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 21 Jul 2019, 23:54
by jetblast16
Who calls it that?


F-15 Eagle: Beagle (E variant, contraction of 'Bomb Eagle'), Mudhen (dark gray 'E variant), Albino (light gray 'C variant), Rodan, Flying Tennis Court, Starship, Ego Jet

F-15A/C Eagle Rhodan, Flying Tennis Court, Starship, Ego Jet

Sources:
http://www.combat.ws/S4/SAILOR/APNDX1.HTM
http://www.coastcomp.com/av/fltline2/nickname.htm


I have heard of the jet being called that, at least in its earlier days by USAF pilots, from other source(s). I'll see if I can find more.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 01:27
by wooster
mixelflick wrote:
jetblast16 wrote:
cc952.jpg


:thumb:


50 years later, the F-15 is still a gorgeous bird.

The new F-15EX (if it comes to pass) will undoubtedly have more powerful motors, but then again I'm sure it'll be heavier too. There's always that weight creep..

I know, I know. "New" and F-15 don't belong in the same sentence. I sure as hell hope they come to their senses and just build more F-35's. Why the USAF continues to make major errors in judgment isn't clear. Gates is gone. Shannahan is gone. Building "new" F-15's seems as ridiculous as building up-rated Flankers and Mig-35's.


The Russians are putting old equipment back into production. Not everything needs to be 5th gen if there is a cost benefit to 4.5 gen. You certainly don't need 5th gen stealth for defense against bears, blackjacks, and cruise missiles. There is a case for the f22 and cruise missiles because of its speed, but in war they won't be wasted patrolling California's Big Sur considering the fleet size. Between the f35 and f15x, neither supercruises, both are limited to well below 2 mach dash and the X has longer legs with fast packs and drop tanks. I cannot speak to radar detection range against small targets, maybe someone else knows.

A new old upgraded plane is better than a 50 year fighter held together with bubble gum and spit. Ask the marines how many of their old hornets are flight capable.

I for one would sleep pretty good at night knowing we are buying 35s and X's until PCA is real.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 01:39
by spazsinbad
The cost of the airyplane STARRYboat is probably not correct according to this PDF attached (giving loss of an F-15C):

https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/503840277034675322/ "...Called the "Starship" by pilots, the costs 15 million per plane..."

"...[F-15C] loss valued at US$42.36m..." AIRforces Monthly Aug 2019 Issue 377

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 13:45
by mixelflick
wooster wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
jetblast16 wrote:
cc952.jpg


:thumb:


50 years later, the F-15 is still a gorgeous bird.

The new F-15EX (if it comes to pass) will undoubtedly have more powerful motors, but then again I'm sure it'll be heavier too. There's always that weight creep..

I know, I know. "New" and F-15 don't belong in the same sentence. I sure as hell hope they come to their senses and just build more F-35's. Why the USAF continues to make major errors in judgment isn't clear. Gates is gone. Shannahan is gone. Building "new" F-15's seems as ridiculous as building up-rated Flankers and Mig-35's.


The Russians are putting old equipment back into production. Not everything needs to be 5th gen if there is a cost benefit to 4.5 gen. You certainly don't need 5th gen stealth for defense against bears, blackjacks, and cruise missiles. There is a case for the f22 and cruise missiles because of its speed, but in war they won't be wasted patrolling California's Big Sur considering the fleet size. Between the f35 and f15x, neither supercruises, both are limited to well below 2 mach dash and the X has longer legs with fast packs and drop tanks. I cannot speak to radar detection range against small targets, maybe someone else knows.

A new old upgraded plane is better than a 50 year fighter held together with bubble gum and spit. Ask the marines how many of their old hornets are flight capable.

I for one would sleep pretty good at night knowing we are buying 35s and X's until PCA is real.


OK, let's consider your "weak point" arguments. First, neither supercruises. That's not really true, as the F-35 can super-cruise at mach 1.2 for short periods of time. With stronger motors that are on the way, it will undoubtely build on that number. F-15 = no supercruise, now or any time in the future.

Both are limited to well under mach 2 dash: OK, but how often is either going to need to? There's no instance of any F-15 needing to exceed mach 1.6 in combat, and remember - that included several engagements where they downed Foxbats. The F-35? Well, it probably won't have to exceed mach 1.6 in flight either. Which is why the requirement was set at... mach 1.6.

F-15X has longer legs with CFT's and drop tanks. OK, but only marginally. You have to factor in all that drag, which also brings WAY down its supersonic dash. And let's not forget, LM and Israel are working on not 1, but 2 sets of drop tanks. When it gets those, it's range will likely surpass the Eagles.

I'll grant you new planes are much better than old ones, but why not all of those new planes be F-35's? It's going to be cheaper to buy, in time cheaper to operate and have a bazillion more ways to identify, track, intercept and bomb targets into oblivion. And oh btw, it's got that stealth thing, something no Eagle anywhere will have.

I just don't buy the F-15X is the best solution for USAF, and hope they don't either..

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 16:22
by playloud
mixelflick wrote:OK, let's consider your "weak point" arguments. First, neither supercruises. That's not really true, as the F-35 can super-cruise at mach 1.2 for short periods of time. With stronger motors that are on the way, it will undoubtely build on that number. F-15 = no supercruise, now or any time in the future.

Both are limited to well under mach 2 dash: OK, but how often is either going to need to? There's no instance of any F-15 needing to exceed mach 1.6 in combat, and remember - that included several engagements where they downed Foxbats. The F-35? Well, it probably won't have to exceed mach 1.6 in flight either. Which is why the requirement was set at... mach 1.6.

F-15X has longer legs with CFT's and drop tanks. OK, but only marginally. You have to factor in all that drag, which also brings WAY down its supersonic dash. And let's not forget, LM and Israel are working on not 1, but 2 sets of drop tanks. When it gets those, it's range will likely surpass the Eagles.

I'll grant you new planes are much better than old ones, but why not all of those new planes be F-35's? It's going to be cheaper to buy, in time cheaper to operate and have a bazillion more ways to identify, track, intercept and bomb targets into oblivion. And oh btw, it's got that stealth thing, something no Eagle anywhere will have.

I just don't buy the F-15X is the best solution for USAF, and hope they don't either..

I believe a single AirForce Magazine article is the only source we have for that Mach 1.2 claim. The F-35 pilot I spoke to at Nellis said the F-35 can't supercruise. He said it can hold just below Mach 1 in level flight. Though he also said he can out accelerate his F-16 chase plane when it's carrying only a centerline tank. He thinks if the tank were removed, acceleration would be about even. The planned new engines can certainly change that however.

Agreed on the dash speeds. I spoke to an F-15E pilot Barksdale just a few weeks ago. He said the fastest he has ever flown is Mach 1.6. EVER.

What you said on the range is very important. The F-15 is pretty much maxed out on range. It is not getting an increase in fuel, and very unlikely to get engines with better fuel burn. The F-35 on the other hand is getting drop tanks in Block 4. CFTs are being discussed. And the planned new engines will improve fuel burn. The F-35, which already has good range, is going to have much better range in time. The F-15 is already maxed out.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 16:53
by wrightwing
playloud wrote:
I believe a single AirForce Magazine article is the only source we have for that Mach 1.2 claim. The F-35 pilot I spoke to at Nellis said the F-35 can't supercruise.


There are several sources for the M1.2/150nm claim. As for supercruising, its important to remember how that term is defined. The US uses M1.5 or above in dry thrust, as the threshold definition of supercruise, not just M1 or above. What wasn't specified, was whether the F-35 can fly at M1.2 in dry thrust, with a combat load. It's very likely that it can, though.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 17:36
by steve2267
I seem to recall a quote from a test pilot or an Air Force pilot (maybe even a general) who stated 1.2 Mach could be maintained with "very minimal" afterburner, but that without reheat, the speed gradually decays to subsonic, and the decay took "about 120 (or 150?) miles."

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 17:41
by spazsinbad
CRUISIN' for a BRUISIN':

From 'SWP' Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise. 04 Nov 2012 viewtopic.php?t=20559 12 pages
"...The F-35, while not technically a "supercruising" aircraft, can maintain Mach 1.2 for a dash of 150 miles without using fuel-gulping afterburners. "Mach 1.2 is a good speed for you, according to the pilots," O’Bryan said...."
http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Magazi ... ghter.aspx

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 17:59
by playloud
spazsinbad wrote:CRUISIN' for a BRUISIN':

From 'SWP' Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise. 04 Nov 2012 viewtopic.php?t=20559 12 pages
"...The F-35, while not technically a "supercruising" aircraft, can maintain Mach 1.2 for a dash of 150 miles without using fuel-gulping afterburners. "Mach 1.2 is a good speed for you, according to the pilots," O’Bryan said...."
http://www.airforce-magazine.com/Magazi ... ghter.aspx

That's the magazine article I'm referring to. That's the only source for that claim that I'm aware of.

The pilot I spoke with at Nellis was very clear that the F-35 cannot hold supersonic speed in level flight in dry thrust, so it wasn't a Mach 1.5 definition thing.

I'm much more inclined to believe the idea that it can stay supersonic for 150 nmi, gradually slowing down, from Mach 1.2. Not supercruise by any definition.

It seems the F-35 isn't great at supersonic speed, but can accelerate extremely well in the subsonic.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 19:15
by sprstdlyscottsmn
playloud, IIRC when you gave a "transcript" of your interview the pilot said they would need 1-2 degrees nose down to hold 1.2M in Mil power. Easy to see how a modest thrust bump would make that sustainable.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 20:09
by playloud
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:playloud, IIRC when you gave a "transcript" of your interview the pilot said they would need 1-2 degrees nose down to hold 1.2M in Mil power. Easy to see how a modest thrust bump would make that sustainable.

That's a good memory, though I think that was to hold Mach 1, and not 1.2 (though perhaps 1.2 is easier, and therefore would still be accurate?)

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 20:14
by wooster
When pilots report that pulling the throttle back is akin to hitting the speed brakes, that is a draggy airframe. When a single engine airplane with 45,000lbs of thrust cannot maintain even 1 Mach without AB in a clean configuration, that is a draggy airframe. There is something wrong with a fighter having that much thrust and not able to go past 1.6 totally clean. People can only assume that its stealth is good enough as the insiders say it is to make up for its kinematic handicaps.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 20:41
by quicksilver
wooster wrote:When pilots report that pulling the throttle back is akin to hitting the speed brakes, that is a draggy airframe. When a single engine airplane with 45,000lbs of thrust cannot maintain even 1 Mach without AB in a clean configuration, that is a draggy airframe. There is something wrong with a fighter having that much thrust and not able to go past 1.6 totally clean. People can only assume that its stealth is good enough as the insiders say it is to make up for its kinematic handicaps.


I'll assume for the moment that you're not just another troll, but merely a newb with an opinion. Tell us exactly which pilot reported such a thing ('hitting the speedbrake'), because amongst the many I (and others) know who fly the jet, none have ever said such a thing, In fact, they say just the opposite.

Also, exactly which fighters in the world carry 2x2K PGMs, 2xmedium range AAMs, a Tpod, a DECM pod, and 18K# of JP out beyond 1.6M?

And pls credibly source your answers for us.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 20:44
by marauder2048
wooster wrote:Not everything needs to be 5th gen if there is a cost benefit to 4.5 gen. You certainly don't need 5th gen stealth for defense against bears, blackjacks, and cruise missiles. There is a case for the f22 and cruise missiles because of its speed, but in war they won't be wasted patrolling California's Big Sur considering the fleet size


In a war, the $70+ million/airframe saved by SLEP'ing the F-15Cs in lieu of F-15Xs buys a lot of SAMs and radars.

And the USMC case isn't comparable since their readiness/SLEP issues were driven by corrosion control or
rather lack thereof.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 22 Jul 2019, 21:13
by steve2267
wooster wrote:When pilots report that pulling the throttle back is akin to hitting the speed brakes, that is a draggy airframe. When a single engine airplane with 45,000lbs of thrust cannot maintain even 1 Mach without AB in a clean configuration, that is a draggy airframe. There is something wrong with a fighter having that much thrust and not able to go past 1.6 totally clean. People can only assume that its stealth is good enough as the insiders say it is to make up for its kinematic handicaps.


Interview with RNoAF Maj. Dolby Hanche

I'll be a bit more precise: With full war equipment, my experience with F-35A is that


It's easier to fly than F-16.
It's faster than F-16. [ That F-16 sure must be a draggy airframe! ]
It has a longer range than F-16.
It flies higher than F-16.
It is more maneuverable than F-16.
It finds opponents on a longer distance (than F-16 would have done).
Opponents discover F-35 later than an F-16 would be found.
And it looks tougher!

...

I want to tell you about another impression from my first flight in F-35, and that's the F-35 is a fast machine. The F-35 keeps effortlessly high speed. Unlike the F-16, this also applies to weapon loads. The machine is so "happy" that we need to make new F-35 pilots especially aware of this. The F-35 is upset if you do not follow. Therefore, it's not uncommon for a flyer without thinking it ends up in supersonic speed!


Yup... sure sounds draggy to me. /smh :doh:

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2019, 01:41
by wooster
1. Maneuvering fighters are not relevant for several years now. Unless you are talking about avoiding another missile. In which case its better to be stealthier to avoid being sighted in the first place.
2. The aircraft cannot hit or maintain even marginal supersonic speed in level flight and clean without AB. Even most business jets today can hit supersonic speed in shallow dives. So finding quotes about accidental supersonic speed are meaningless with fighters as they can achieve flight attitudes far beyond civilian aircraft which while not designed for supersonic flight sure have no problem achieving it with thrust to weight ratios not even 0.5. The f-35 acheiving marginal supersonic speed with the worlds most powerful engine in dives isn't an achievement.
3. The USAF had to relax the acceleration requirements when the 35A could not achieve the requirement
4. If I can find the quotes I will post.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2019, 01:48
by steve2267
I politely suggest you stop (and read a LOT of what is on this forum) while you are ahead.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2019, 09:45
by nathan77
wooster wrote:When pilots report that pulling the throttle back is akin to hitting the speed brakes, that is a draggy airframe.


Actually, if you read pilots reports of trying to land the "B" model vertically - the hardest thing is getting it to slow down as it doesn't want to even after you've eased back the throttle.

I think what you're confused with is "pulling back on the stick is akin to hitting the speed brakes". This is because the F-35 has a higher angle-of-attack than many other fighters. So if you pull back on the stick you're flying with the belly of the plane towards the direction of travel. This slows the plane down fast (and if you read pilot blogs like Hanche's it's a common dog-fighting technique in the F-35 to force the opponent to overshoot).


wooster wrote:There is something wrong with a fighter having that much thrust and not able to go past 1.6 totally clean.

Note that the 1.6 top speed is when carrying a combat load of 2 x 2000lb bombs and 2 x AIM-120's. Some other fighters can't even carry 2000lb bombs (which are designed to take out bunkers). And carrying 5000lb of combat weight decreases the F-35's thrust to weight ratio. The top-speed of a 'clean' F-35 isn't actually known (and it's operationally irrelevant anyway) - but certainly we know that the F-35 has exceeded Mach 1.6 in testing. Certainly the feature that prevents the F-35 from being Mach 2+ capable is the fact is lacks variable geometry inlets (which effectively speed limits it).

It's worth reading the thread: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=25735&start=780

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2019, 11:50
by zero-one
wooster wrote:1. Maneuvering fighters are not relevant for several years now. Unless you are talking about avoiding another missile. In which case its better to be stealthier to avoid being sighted in the first place.


Are you basing this on combat simulations or actual combat, because you're wrong either way.

Actual Combat
If you listen to Dozer's retelling of his engagements over Bosnia, you'll notice that he did not fly straight and level, there was maneuvering involved even if he was still at BVR ranges. A common misconception is that agility is only needed in WVR, its very important in BVR as well.

Combat simulations (Relatively modern Su-30 vs 3 F-16Cs)
one Su-30 vs three F-16 in a BVR scenario. Again, we pushed the envelope, manoeuvred between 3000 ft to 32000 ft, pulling up to 8 g, turning, tumbling, firing and escaping missiles in a simulated engagement. The crew co-ord between us in the cockpit and the fighter controller on the ground was the best that I have ever seen! The results in a mock combat are always contentious but with ACMI, they are more reliable. End score one F-16 claimed without loss. When we got out of the cockpit we were thoroughly drenched in sweat and tired from the continuous high G manoeuvring but all smiles for the ecstasy that we had just experienced.”

Lastly, F-35 test pilot Tom Morganfeld can be quoted by saying
"Even with HOBS and LOAL, Maneuverability will "Always" be relevant in a fighter"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sTsjQ_ud8E

wooster wrote:2. The aircraft cannot hit or maintain even marginal supersonic speed in level flight and clean without AB. Even most business jets today can hit supersonic speed in shallow dives.

-But it's subsonic acceleration is like a clean F-16C even with weapons carried internally, that means its better than a
practically almost every other plane barring the F-22, so thats better than a Flanker, better a fulcrum.

wooster wrote:3. The USAF had to relax the acceleration requirements when the 35A could not achieve the requirement

Isn't this the 2012 report, if you read it, it says the DoD "expressed the desire to reduce sustained G and acceleration goals due to accelerated degradation on the Stealth coatings on tail"

1. They only expressed the desire, it was never implemented IIRC
2. the issue was never the result of drag or power at all, it was the stealth coatings that were not holding up, newer stealth coatings should completely mitigate that. In fact the blistering in the stealth coatings in the tail seem to happen when the B and C versions fly beyond Mach 1.3 at extreme altitudes also. But they have mitigated the problem.
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06 ... h-coating/
News that the department has taken steps to mitigate the problem with an improved spray-on coating

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2019, 13:58
by quicksilver

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2019, 21:30
by outlaw162
"Sir, he's gaining on us."

"Don't worry, I read on F16net that biz-jets can go supersonic in a shallow dive. We'll just leave him in the dust."

"But sir, VNE is .92 Mach."

"Don't worry, those numbers don't mean anything. Hold my beer and watch this."

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 23 Jul 2019, 22:22
by marauder2048
IIRC, the record was Mach 0.995 for the G650 in a 15 degree dive.

Re: F-35 performance at Haboob Havoc 2019

Unread postPosted: 24 Jul 2019, 01:03
by wrightwing
wooster wrote:When pilots report that pulling the throttle back is akin to hitting the speed brakes, that is a draggy airframe. When a single engine airplane with 45,000lbs of thrust cannot maintain even 1 Mach without AB in a clean configuration, that is a draggy airframe. There is something wrong with a fighter having that much thrust and not able to go past 1.6 totally clean. People can only assume that its stealth is good enough as the insiders say it is to make up for its kinematic handicaps.

No pilots have said such a thing. They have uniformly said that it's easy to overspeed the aircraft, and that the plane wants to fly fast. M1.6 isn't the aerodynamic speed limit, by the way.