4th vs 5th gen differences

We all know what they say.........."The devil is in the details"

So, will this put to rest the talk of some posters of how the f-35 is clearly more maneuverable than 4th gen fighters, or are we still going to see countless pages on this forum dedicated to comparing airshow videos in order to gauge combat ability?

Regardless this was a good listen.

He did say however that he hasn't had a chance to go out and "really rage" in the aircraft. It seems like his main focus is developmental and operational testing of sensors and weapons. In this interview it seems like flight envelope isn't his main focus.

Regardless this was a good listen.

He did say however that he hasn't had a chance to go out and "really rage" in the aircraft. It seems like his main focus is developmental and operational testing of sensors and weapons. In this interview it seems like flight envelope isn't his main focus.

Au contraire. He is/was a DT pilot, and spoke specifically about ‘flight sciences’ testing which is all about handling qualities and envelope expansion.

cl223, quicksilver is correct. Also, even though Maj. Searcy may also be tasked and may be responsible for testing of certain specific systems during DT, as a qualified Lightning pilot, he would have to know exactly the level of performance of the jet.

So, will this put to rest the talk of some posters of how the f-35 is clearly more maneuverable than 4th gen fighters, or are we still going to see countless pages on this forum dedicated to comparing airshow videos in order to gauge combat ability?

It should, but I’m betting it won’t.

Funny thing is (or maybe it isn’t funny for some), I can think of at least 3 other Lightning pilots who have publicly stated in the past that the F-35’s maneuverability is only on par with the best 4th Gen fighters and that it’ll NEVER equal the F-22’s level of maneuverability, despite what some F-35 fans that wants to put it in the Raptor’s level.

The reaction is literally always the same and predictable. These statements appear, some Lightning fans immediately ignore it and / or quickly point out some other feature about it (downplaying the maneuverability part as not important) and go from there. Then…they see a demo of it doing some post stall maneuvers or a turn (that others have been doing for years) and the Lightning crowd roars again praising its agility.

Maj. Searcy is just the latest Lightning pilot that I’ve heard to have publicly stated what some in the Lightning fanbase has to understand: the jet is built from day one to fulfill a role and has a certain responsibility. In the US at least, it is to compliment the F-22. It is the low end of a Hi-Lo mix. It was made primarily for air-to-ground, but with some overlapping and credible air-to-air capability as is the inverse with the F-22: primarily air-to-air with credible air-to-ground capability. One cannot totally replace the other in their primary roles.

The Lightning is a worthy replacement for the legendary F-16. It has stealth and the sensors to operate and survive in anti-access / anti-denial areas that the F-16 cannot without a possible high loss rate and attack the targets within those areas. If F-22s isn’t around, it can defend itself and take out the occasional air threat that may be in the area or reroute itself away from the air threat. In a maneuvering fight (which the Lightning pilot(s) will have to answer a lot of questions as to why it did to if it ever ends up there) it will have a level of maneuverability that will be slightly better than, equal in others and slightly lagging in certain parameters compared to potential threats that it’ll likely face now and in the immediate future.

Certain people in the Lightning fanbase needs to understand this. Otherwise, they’ll continue to be disingenuous to themselves.

Regardless this was a good listen.

He did say however that he hasn't had a chance to go out and "really rage" in the aircraft. It seems like his main focus is developmental and operational testing of sensors and weapons. In this interview it seems like flight envelope isn't his main focus.

Regardless this was a good listen.

He did say however that he hasn't had a chance to go out and "really rage" in the aircraft. It seems like his main focus is developmental and operational testing of sensors and weapons. In this interview it seems like flight envelope isn't his main focus.

Au contraire. He is/was a DT pilot, and spoke specifically about ‘flight sciences’ testing which is all about handling qualities and envelope expansion.

cl223, quicksilver is correct. Also, even though Maj. Searcy may also be tasked and may be responsible for testing of certain specific systems during DT, as a qualified Lightning pilot, he would have to know exactly the level of performance of the jet.

So, will this put to rest the talk of some posters of how the f-35 is clearly more maneuverable than 4th gen fighters, or are we still going to see countless pages on this forum dedicated to comparing airshow videos in order to gauge combat ability?

It should, but I’m betting it won’t.

Funny thing is (or maybe it isn’t funny for some), I can think of at least 3 other Lightning pilots who have publicly stated in the past that the F-35’s maneuverability is only on par with the best 4th Gen fighters and that it’ll NEVER equal the F-22’s level of maneuverability, despite what some F-35 fans that wants to put it in the Raptor’s level.

The reaction is literally always the same and predictable. These statements appear, some Lightning fans immediately ignore it and / or quickly point out some other feature about it (downplaying the maneuverability part as not important) and go from there. Then…they see a demo of it doing some post stall maneuvers or a turn (that others have been doing for years) and the Lightning crowd roars again praising its agility.

Maj. Searcy is just the latest Lightning pilot that I’ve heard to have publicly stated what some in the Lightning fanbase has to understand: the jet is built from day one to fulfill a role and has a certain responsibility. In the US at least, it is to compliment the F-22. It is the low end of a Hi-Lo mix. It was made primarily for air-to-ground, but with some overlapping and credible air-to-air capability as is the inverse with the F-22: primarily air-to-air with credible air-to-ground capability. One cannot totally replace the other in their primary roles.

The Lightning is a worthy replacement for the legendary F-16. It has stealth and the sensors to operate and survive in anti-access / anti-denial areas that the F-16 cannot without a possible high loss rate and attack the targets within those areas. If F-22s isn’t around, it can defend itself and take out the occasional air threat that may be in the area or reroute itself away from the air threat. In a maneuvering fight (which the Lightning pilot(s) will have to answer a lot of questions as to why it did to if it ever ends up there) it will have a level of maneuverability that will be slightly better than, equal in others and slightly lagging in certain parameters compared to potential threats that it’ll likely face now and in the immediate future.

Certain people in the Lightning fanbase needs to understand this. Otherwise, they’ll continue to be disingenuous to themselves.

So, three out of hundreds of F-35 Pilots.

Honestly, why not quote somebody with experience in both the F-22 and F-35 like Lt. Col. David "Chip" Berke (Ret) and/or Col. Paul “Max” Moga???



https://www.businessinsider.com/f35-pil ... ing-2017-1

Jon Beesley former F-22 and F-35 Test Pilot..


In terms of aerodynamic performance, the F-35 is an excellent machine, Beesley said. Having previously been only
the second man ever to have flown the F-22 Raptor, Beesley became the first pilot ever to fly the F-35 in late 2006.
As such, Beesley is intimately familiar with both programs. According to Beesley, the four current test pilots for F-35
have been most impressed by the aircraft's thrust and acceleration. In the subsonic flight regime, the F-35 very
nearly matches the performance of its' larger, more powerful cousin, the F-22 Raptor, Beesley explained. The
"subsonic acceleration is about as good as a clean Block 50 F-16 or a Raptor- which is about as good as you can
get." Beesley said.

The aircraft flies in "large measure like the F-22, but it's smaller, and stiffer" than the Raptor however, Beesley
explained, adding that the aircraft handles superbly. The reason for the similar flight characteristics, explained the
test pilot, is because the man who designed the flight control laws for the Raptor, is also the same man who is
responsible for the flight control software for the F-35. As Beesley explains, the flight control laws of modern fighters
determine to large extent the flight characteristics of a given aircraft. Beesley said that the aircraft is so stable and so
comfortable that the test pilots find themselves inadvertently drifting too close to their wingmen in formation.
What Beesley expects will surprise future F-35 pilots is the jets' superb low speed handling characteristics and poststall manoeuvrability. While the F-22 with its thrust vectored controls performs better at the slow speeds and high angle of attack (AOA) flight regime, the F-35 will be able match most of the same high AOA manoeuvres as the
Raptor, although it will not be able to do so as quickly as the more powerful jet in some cases. Turning at the higher
Gs and higher speed portions of the flight envelope, the F-35 will "almost exactly match a clean Block 50 F-16 and
3/5
comes very close to the Raptor", Beesley said.

Ironically, the Navy version, which has larger wings but a lower G limit of 7.5G, has the best turning capability of the
three F-35 versions Beesley explained. The Air Force version, meanwhile, has the best acceleration and is rated for
9Gs, Beesley said. Davis, explaining that the Marine Corps deemphasizes manoeuvrability in its air combat
doctrine, said that the short take off, vertical landing (STOVL) USMC plane has a 7G limit. Beesley said that the
aircraft makes up for the lower G limit by offering the flexibility in basing required by the Marines. Nor does the
STOVL give up too much in range because of the engine driven lift fan installed behind the cockpit, Beesley said.
The jet has "a range of more than 500 miles", while the Air Force and Navy planes both have ranges greater than
600 miles, Beesley explained, adding that the USAF version has as much internal fuel capacity as the larger twin
engined F-22 Raptor.

While supersonically the F-35 is limited to a seemingly unimpressive Mach 1.6 in level flight, Davis explains that the
JSF is optimized for exceptional subsonic to supersonic acceleration. Transonic acceleration is much more relevant
to a fighter pilot than the absolute max speed of the jet, Davis said. Davis, who was previously the program manager
for the F-15 Eagle, explains that while the Eagle is a Mach 2 class fighter, it has rarely exceed the threshold of Mach
1.2 to Mach 1.3 during it's entire 30 year life span. Additionally, the time the aircraft has spent in the supersonic flight
regime can be measured in minutes rather than hours- most of the supersonic flights were in fact during specialized
flights such as Functional Check Flights (FCF). "I don't see how that gets you an advantage" Davis said, referring to
the Mach 2+ capability. Beesley said that in terms of supersonic flight that the F-35 is still more than competitive with
existing designs.

Comparisons to the F-22 Raptor are unfair as "supersonically, the Raptor is in a class by itself. It lives there,"
Beesley explained. "In many ways the Raptor is the first true supersonic fighter," Beesley added, referring to that
aircrafts' much publicized and unique supersonic cruise capability.

download/file.php?id=23836

So, will this put to rest the talk of some posters of how the f-35 is clearly more maneuverable than 4th gen fighters, or are we still going to see countless pages on this forum dedicated to comparing airshow videos in order to gauge combat ability?

It should, but I’m betting it won’t.

Look above. My point made.

Look above. My point made.

Your predicting powers are great,
Can you please tell me the winning numbers of the next lottery?



Ps, good explanation about the made with a purpose in mind.

Jon Beesley former F-22 and F-35 Test Pilot..

Though I'm not questioning the credibility of Mr Beesley, but we need to put this into context.
These statements were made very early into the program where the F-35's flight envelope were still largely made up of estimates from wind tunnel testing etc.

Now I'm not saying that Mr Beesley based his statements entirely on that. But he was doing these test very early in the testing phase. Most likely these were done on the best and safest parts of the F-35's maneuvering envelope. Weight growth has yet to set in.
And in those conditions, The F-35 could perform quite closely to the F-22.
The F-35's full envelope hasn't been opened until very recently. So comparisons between the 2 plane's kinematics can only be drawn accurately from now on. Post Block 3F age



IIRC these statements were also made around 2008, give or take. Was the F-22's maneuvering envelope already fully opened at that time? Legitimate question. Was Beesley able to fly the Raptor when the entire envelope was opened up already?

So yes, perhaps in some parts of the envelope, in the subsonic region the F-35 can hang with the F-22, F-16 and Typhoon. In other parts the F-35 will be slightly inferior and yes there will be parts where the F-35 will frankly just be Outclassed (i.e. high and fast, supersonic maneuverability,)

Jon Beesley former F-22 and F-35 Test Pilot..

Though I'm not questioning the credibility of Mr Beesley, but we need to put this into context.
These statements were made very early into the program where the F-35's flight envelope were still largely made up of estimates from wind tunnel testing etc.

Now I'm not saying that Mr Beesley based his statements entirely on that. But he was doing these test very early in the testing phase. Most likely these were done on the best and safest parts of the F-35's maneuvering envelope. Weight growth has yet to set in.
And in those conditions, The F-35 could perform quite closely to the F-22.
The F-35's full envelope hasn't been opened until very recently. So comparisons between the 2 plane's kinematics can only be drawn accurately from now on. Post Block 3F age



IIRC these statements were also made around 2008, give or take. Was the F-22's maneuvering envelope already fully opened at that time? Legitimate question. Was Beesley able to fly the Raptor when the entire envelope was opened up already?

So yes, perhaps in some parts of the envelope, in the subsonic region the F-35 can hang with the F-22, F-16 and Typhoon. In other parts the F-35 will be slightly inferior and yes there will be parts where the F-35 will frankly just be Outclassed (i.e. high and fast, supersonic maneuverability,)

I doubt Mr. Beesley is "guessing" how the F-35 would perform in relationship to the F-22. Nonetheless, he does concede the latters advantages at higher portions of the flight envelope. Of course how useful that would be is another question mark. Especially, as it relates to IFR....

I doubt Mr. Beesley is "guessing" how the F-35 would perform in relationship to the F-22. Nonetheless, he does concede the latters advantages at higher portions of the flight envelope. Of course how useful that would be is another question mark. Especially, as it relates to IFR....

I'm pretty sure he wasn't guessing. But he flew both planes in the early phases of their testing. There are specific test points to be hit which are in the early phases of envelope expansion that are easy to hit for both planes.

I.E. Mr. Beasley could have been tasked to test both planes within their 5G envelope at subsonic, 20K. Something that both can do relatively easily. His observation was that, both aircraft are evenly matched.

But today Raptor pilots who have been flying it in it's full envelope for years see the F-35 at block 3F and notice that substantial gap in performance in some parts.

Its not contradicting anything, there are parts of the envelope where the F-16 can hang with the F-22. But then again we have plenty of reports where Raptor pilots say they enjoy substantial maneuvering advantages over anything including the F-16. Same goes for the F-35.

I think Kinematics will actually become a bit more relevant in the age of Stealth. Specially when you have a Stealth vs Stealth scenario. It will still be largely BVR but the prospects of a Merge is more plausible when detection ranges are reduced

So yes, perhaps in some parts of the envelope, in the subsonic region the F-35 can hang with the F-22, F-16 and Typhoon. In other parts the F-35 will be slightly inferior and yes there will be parts where the F-35 will frankly just be Outclassed (i.e. high and fast, supersonic maneuverability,)

We also need to decide what configurations we are comparing. F-22 and F-35 will almost always be flying totally clean as all the weapons, fuel and other systems are internal. All 4th gen fighter will be flying clean (or close to it) in airshows most of the time. In real world combat configurations they will have very lower performance than in clean configurations, sometimes really significantly. F-35 really shines in air-to-ground configurations where it's still Mach 1.6 and 7-9G machine which no 4th gen fighter can match. In air-to-air configurations or in clean configurations, I have no trouble accepting that 4th gen fighters can have equal or sometimes (clean or lightly loaded) even better performance. It seems like even F-22 doesn't always have much better performance than 4th gen fighters.

We also need to decide what configurations we are comparing.

Yes I understand. This is always one of the major counter arguments we give when comparing the F-35 against 4th gens. The F-35 will fight clean while 4th gens will be weighed down by missiles, bombs, external fuel tanks, sensor pods, jamming pods etc.

To visualize the comparison better, lets look at speed. Because unlike maneuverability, speed is easier to represent.
Your Typical high performance 4th gen is Mach 2 capable when clean, the F-35 is Mach 1.6 when clean.
'Configured for combat however, 4th gens will be lucky to get to Mach 1.5, but I think they can when configured for just A-A.
the F-35 remains at Mach 1.6 when configured for A-A.

So to recap:
4th gen A-A: Mach 1.5
F-35: Mach 1.6
F-22: Mach 2+ (possibly Mach 2.42)

So by using the Speed Criteria we can clearly see what Pilots mean when they say that an F-35 performs like the best 4th gens (F-16, F/A-18 or Typhoon). We also see the substantial gap the F-22 has over everyone else.

Remember, both the F-35 and 4th gens will actually struggle to reach Mach 1.5, they can probably do it at certain altitudes. F-15 pilots say they usually only reach up to Mach 1.3, so 1.5 will take some effort. The F-22 on the other hand effortlessly cruises at 1.8 without AB.

I believe this Gap translates into maneuverability as well. Yes the F-35 is a 9G machine even when loaded. The F-16 and Typhoon can also reach 9Gs with some ordnance. But they can only do it once certain parameters are met. The Raptor can get to 9Gs easier, at more altitudes.

Can’t believe some take the bait and run down the rabbit hole once more...

It should, but I’m betting it won’t.

Funny thing is (or maybe it isn’t funny for some), I can think of at least 3 other Lightning pilots who have publicly stated in the past that the F-35’s maneuverability is only on par with the best 4th Gen fighters and that it’ll NEVER equal the F-22’s level of maneuverability, despite what some F-35 fans that wants to put it in the Raptor’s level.

The reaction is literally always the same and predictable. These statements appear, some Lightning fans immediately ignore it and / or quickly point out some other feature about it (downplaying the maneuverability part as not important) and go from there. Then…they see a demo of it doing some post stall maneuvers or a turn (that others have been doing for years) and the Lightning crowd roars again praising its agility.

Maj. Searcy is just the latest Lightning pilot that I’ve heard to have publicly stated what some in the Lightning fanbase has to understand: the jet is built from day one to fulfill a role and has a certain responsibility. In the US at least, it is to compliment the F-22. It is the low end of a Hi-Lo mix. It was made primarily for air-to-ground, but with some overlapping and credible air-to-air capability as is the inverse with the F-22: primarily air-to-air with credible air-to-ground capability. One cannot totally replace the other in their primary roles.

The Lightning is a worthy replacement for the legendary F-16. It has stealth and the sensors to operate and survive in anti-access / anti-denial areas that the F-16 cannot without a possible high loss rate and attack the targets within those areas. If F-22s isn’t around, it can defend itself and take out the occasional air threat that may be in the area or reroute itself away from the air threat. In a maneuvering fight (which the Lightning pilot(s) will have to answer a lot of questions as to why it did to if it ever ends up there) it will have a level of maneuverability that will be slightly better than, equal in others and slightly lagging in certain parameters compared to potential threats that it’ll likely face now and in the immediate future.

Certain people in the Lightning fanbase needs to understand this. Otherwise, they’ll continue to be disingenuous to themselves.

Thanks a lot for your honest words. Some times when you read some comments here, the F-35 seems the best Fighter in every parameter. Or in german words "eine eierlegende Wollmilchsau."

If i may ask a you, on what position would you put maneuverability in a air to air fight Today. Compare to Stealth, sensor, sensor vision and EW (BVR and WVR).

Yes, there are some that do tend to go too "overboard" on the F-35. In that 99.9% of us here are not military pilots; and 99.9% of us do not have a clearance to view classified material.


I think the F-35 is a great jet, and a real game changer. It is the future. Our teen series (legacy) jets are too old, tired, and had their day back in the 1980's-90's.


However, I think that it becomes rather dangerous when some try to imply that the F-35 is nearly an F-22; or it can out accelerate a Eurofighter Typhoon- with no proof. Or goes contrary to what other pilots have said.