J-XX stealth fighter

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

megasun

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012, 20:14
  • Location: CA

Unread post13 Mar 2012, 21:21

strykerxo wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
strykerxo wrote:Hypothetically speaking, as notional Chinese requirement that thier new AC at some level is roughly competitive with the F-22. The unknown is a factor, but if the Chinese even acheived a lesser degree of equality with the F-22, then it has some superior charactoristics over the F-35. Charactoristics that can be used as strengths against the F-35, whose strengths would be EW and stealth.

Is the F-35 the best solution for the Asian Pacific, to counter the T-50 & J-20?


The F-35 will be more than capable of taking on the PAK-FA and J-20. Plus, it will be available in far greater numbers........


Agreed, my point is that nations like Japan or Korea would be using the F-35 as an inteceptor type platform. Is the F-35 capable of this mission given the greater speed/altitude (assumed) of the J-20 and T-50.


I have the same feeling.
I'm sure F-22 is not easily matched, but F-35, it focuses more on "Striking" rather than aerial combat; it's costly and slow; it lacks altitude and super cruise, which are important in BVR combat.
This won't be a problem for USAF, who has F-22 and a great number of aircrafts. But for all allies that rely on F-35 for air supremacy, it can be difficult when facing J-20 or T-50, and they don't have an alternative aircraft. It may even be a problem for US Navy, whose arsenal is full of striking aircraft...
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 434
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post14 Mar 2012, 00:42

megasun wrote:
strykerxo wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
strykerxo wrote:Hypothetically speaking, as notional Chinese requirement that thier new AC at some level is roughly competitive with the F-22. The unknown is a factor, but if the Chinese even acheived a lesser degree of equality with the F-22, then it has some superior charactoristics over the F-35. Charactoristics that can be used as strengths against the F-35, whose strengths would be EW and stealth.

Is the F-35 the best solution for the Asian Pacific, to counter the T-50 & J-20?


The F-35 will be more than capable of taking on the PAK-FA and J-20. Plus, it will be available in far greater numbers........


Agreed, my point is that nations like Japan or Korea would be using the F-35 as an inteceptor type platform. Is the F-35 capable of this mission given the greater speed/altitude (assumed) of the J-20 and T-50.


I have the same feeling.
I'm sure F-22 is not easily matched, but F-35, it focuses more on "Striking" rather than aerial combat; it's costly and slow; it lacks altitude and super cruise, which are important in BVR combat.
This won't be a problem for USAF, who has F-22 and a great number of aircrafts. But for all allies that rely on F-35 for air supremacy, it can be difficult when facing J-20 or T-50, and they don't have an alternative aircraft. It may even be a problem for US Navy, whose arsenal is full of striking aircraft...


If the F-35 can be found and it's tactics defeated, maybe the J-20 & T-50 have a chance. The F-35 will also be a handful in a WVR dogfight, if either can get a lock on it, like the F-22, while the Raptor provides CAP. Lets not forget the overwhelming number and sophistication of F-35 that would be available in a war of attrition.

Stealth can be an air superiority characristic.
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3271
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post14 Mar 2012, 03:00

megasun wrote:I have the same feeling.
I'm sure F-22 is not easily matched, but F-35, it focuses more on "Striking" rather than aerial combat; it's costly and slow; it lacks altitude and super cruise, which are important in BVR combat.

How fast and high do you imagine an F-35 opponent will be flying? I'd love to hear some numbers, both for the foe and the F-35, that you're giving them credit for.
Offline

megasun

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012, 20:14
  • Location: CA

Unread post14 Mar 2012, 19:26

wrightwing wrote:How fast and high do you imagine an F-35 opponent will be flying? I'd love to hear some numbers, both for the foe and the F-35, that you're giving them credit for.

Grab whatever information you like from anywhere, bro. There may not be accurate number for other 5Gs, but it's easy to find 4G fighter numbers to compare. The fat bird isn't build for height and speed. And it fails to be an economical complementation of F-22, as in 2013 budget, the projected future acquisition cost increases over 2012.
When F-22 rolled out, remember the bragging about how super cruise and height and energy can help it extend BVR missile range, and how it can dash and shoot and supersonic maneuver back and dash again. That's not the strike fighter's priority attributes, but will be its opponents'. And F-35 has no more than 4 missiles in the shooting game.

strykerxo wrote:If the F-35 can be found and it's tactics defeated, maybe the J-20 & T-50 have a chance. The F-35 will also be a handful in a WVR dogfight, if either can get a lock on it, like the F-22, while the Raptor provides CAP. Lets not forget the overwhelming number and sophistication of F-35 that would be available in a war of attrition.

Stealth can be an air superiority characristic.

I have no doubt in what you're saying. I just worry about ally countries who will have only F-35. So will US Navy, who faces no serious challenge since Tomcat retired.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8391
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post14 Mar 2012, 19:47

A 4th gen jet loaded down with weapons and gas bags will never see it's max altitude and speed numbers. The F-35, OTOH, can spend whatever time it wants at max speed & altitude while still caring max fuel & 4 AAMs (later 6 per Blk5).
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 434
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post14 Mar 2012, 20:47

megasun wrote:
strykerxo wrote:If the F-35 can be found and it's tactics defeated, maybe the J-20 & T-50 have a chance. The F-35 will also be a handful in a WVR dogfight, if either can get a lock on it, like the F-22, while the Raptor provides CAP. Lets not forget the overwhelming number and sophistication of F-35 that would be available in a war of attrition.

Stealth can be an air superiority characristic.

I have no doubt in what you're saying. I just worry about ally countries who will have only F-35. So will US Navy, who faces no serious challenge since Tomcat retired.


Spudman is right, once you saddle up a 4th gen for intercept, the only difference between them and a F-35 will be stealth and EW. Stealth gives you a great advantage over all comers and the EW suite will be second to none.

I see your concern about the T-50 / J-20, but the jury is still out. They will be formidable AC, but internal weapons and TV (T-50) do not make F-22/35 equals.
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3271
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post14 Mar 2012, 21:12

megasun wrote: Grab whatever information you like from anywhere, bro. There may not be accurate number for other 5Gs, but it's easy to find 4G fighter numbers to compare. The fat bird isn't build for height and speed.


Again, you're making ambiguous assertions. How high do you think the 4G opponent will be flying, and how high do you think that the F-35 will be flying? Additionally, I'd love to hear the speed advantages you believe a foe would have.


When F-22 rolled out, remember the bragging about how super cruise and height and energy can help it extend BVR missile range, and how it can dash and shoot and supersonic maneuver back and dash again. That's not the strike fighter's priority attributes, but will be its opponents'. And F-35 has no more than 4 missiles in the shooting game.


Supercruise and height are an advantage that the F-22 possesses. Once the PAK FA, and J-20 enter service, then potential foes will also enjoy those attributes. The thing to bear in mind is that none of these aircraft will be flying around supersonically at all times. They'll cruise subsonically till there's a target to engage/threat to avoid, for endurance purposes. Compared to 4G foes, there is really no speed/altitude advantages vs. an F-35. The F-35 has a ceiling in the 55k+ range-, and a combat speed of M1.6 with full internal weapons load. It won't be fighting Flankers/Fulcrums from 25k, and M.8. The F-35 at IOC will carry 4 internal AAMs. It will eventually carry at least 6.
Offline

megasun

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012, 20:14
  • Location: CA

Unread post15 Mar 2012, 07:02

Right, I'm not comparing F-35 against other 4Gs, I use 4Gs as number to show M2 speed and 20,000 meter height isn't so difficult to achieve, and F-35 chose not to.
F-22 sets the standard for 5G fighters, so called 4S, stealthy and super cruise and so on, and other countries are following the path. When ally countries finally get F-35 in many years, it will face other potential 5G air superiority fighters, designed as 'Not a pound for air-to-ground', T-50 or J-XX, as the topic of this post.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4484
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post15 Mar 2012, 14:04

Right, but F-35 will still enjoy first look first shot capability as well as offboard sensors networking. While a typical IRST has a quite limited FOV and can claim x range vs y aspect and z engine setting, the DAS has demonstrated spherical coverage with enough sensativity to detect the thermal difference between a building and its windows from over a dozen miles. The F-35 will detect all jet aircraft that lack B-2 levels of IR suppression from well outide of the range it can be detected by an airborn radar.
"Spurts"

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

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3271
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post15 Mar 2012, 14:10

megasun wrote:Right, I'm not comparing F-35 against other 4Gs, I use 4Gs as number to show M2 speed and 20,000 meter height isn't so difficult to achieve, and F-35 chose not to.
F-22 sets the standard for 5G fighters, so called 4S, stealthy and super cruise and so on, and other countries are following the path. When ally countries finally get F-35 in many years, it will face other potential 5G air superiority fighters, designed as 'Not a pound for air-to-ground', T-50 or J-XX, as the topic of this post.


No fighters, 4G or 5G, will be flying at M2, so that number is irrelevant. Even the F-22(or PAK FA/J-20), won't be loitering at 20,000m, so that isn't a particularly relevant statistic either. All fighters of any generation, will spend the vast majority of the time subsonic, until they detect targets to engage, or see threats that they want to avoid.
Offline

megasun

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012, 20:14
  • Location: CA

Unread post16 Mar 2012, 10:00

wrightwing wrote:
megasun wrote:Right, I'm not comparing F-35 against other 4Gs, I use 4Gs as number to show M2 speed and 20,000 meter height isn't so difficult to achieve, and F-35 chose not to.
F-22 sets the standard for 5G fighters, so called 4S, stealthy and super cruise and so on, and other countries are following the path. When ally countries finally get F-35 in many years, it will face other potential 5G air superiority fighters, designed as 'Not a pound for air-to-ground', T-50 or J-XX, as the topic of this post.


No fighters, 4G or 5G, will be flying at M2, so that number is irrelevant. Even the F-22(or PAK FA/J-20), won't be loitering at 20,000m, so that isn't a particularly relevant statistic either. All fighters of any generation, will spend the vast majority of the time subsonic, until they detect targets to engage, or see threats that they want to avoid.


Not just at M2, lower max speed means lower acceleration at M1.5, M1.2, etc. So is height to climb rate. They are still crucial characteristics for all gens.
When starting from similar position, F-22 for example, can soon reach a better height and speed than its opponent and shoot missiles from a longer range.
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 870
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post16 Mar 2012, 10:20

megasun wrote:
wrightwing wrote:
megasun wrote:Right, I'm not comparing F-35 against other 4Gs, I use 4Gs as number to show M2 speed and 20,000 meter height isn't so difficult to achieve, and F-35 chose not to.
F-22 sets the standard for 5G fighters, so called 4S, stealthy and super cruise and so on, and other countries are following the path. When ally countries finally get F-35 in many years, it will face other potential 5G air superiority fighters, designed as 'Not a pound for air-to-ground', T-50 or J-XX, as the topic of this post.


No fighters, 4G or 5G, will be flying at M2, so that number is irrelevant. Even the F-22(or PAK FA/J-20), won't be loitering at 20,000m, so that isn't a particularly relevant statistic either. All fighters of any generation, will spend the vast majority of the time subsonic, until they detect targets to engage, or see threats that they want to avoid.


Not just at M2, lower max speed means lower acceleration at M1.5, M1.2, .


No, that is not the case. Top speed and acceleration are different metrics, and while they are often related, they are not the same. The key limitation of the F-35's top speed is its engine design and the position of its wings. In general it is the leading edge sweep that matters, in particular when it hits the shock cone at supersonic speeds. Once it does the amount of energy needed to increase speed increases exponentially. Really the fighter's acceleration up to that point is unrelated. Beyond that point it will likely drop dramatically. The engine is built with that in mind. Its rated to around 1.6; Beyond that, it becomes less efficient at handling the supersonic airflow entering into the engine. Really the F-35 was design to be very effective in the transonic regime; its just really not great outside of that. However performance in the transonic regime is what the USAF and Navy identify as being where most air to air combat occurs, principles that have guided all fighter aircraft design since the late 1960s.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3271
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post16 Mar 2012, 18:37

megasun wrote:
Not just at M2, lower max speed means lower acceleration at M1.5, M1.2, etc. So is height to climb rate. They are still crucial characteristics for all gens.
When starting from similar position, F-22 for example, can soon reach a better height and speed than its opponent and shoot missiles from a longer range.
Top speed has nothing to do with acceleration, or climb rates. The fighter that sees the foe first, will be able to accelerate first. This is where the F-35 has major advantages. The thing to remember about the M1.6 speed, that is a combat speed, with full internal weapons load. 4G fighters can't get anywhere near their top speeds, in combat configuration, nor can they maintain those speeds for more than a few minutes, before running out of fuel. The F-15 can reach M2.5 theoretically, but has never flown faster than M1.4 in combat.
Offline

cynical175

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2011, 21:24
  • Location: Nanaimo

Unread post16 Mar 2012, 18:50

Exuse this ignorant guy BUT the JSF-36 at M1.6 isn't at full afterburner?
Offline

cynical175

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 18
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2011, 21:24
  • Location: Nanaimo

Unread post16 Mar 2012, 18:52

Sorry my mistake before you jump at me it is JSF-35 that i ment to say.
Never the less isn't afterburner like flushing your fuel down the toilet for any fighter?
PreviousNext

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest