F-35 Completes First Live Air-to-Air Kill Test [AIM-9X]

F-35 Armament, fuel tanks, internal and external hardpoints, loadouts, and other stores.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2872
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post02 Aug 2016, 20:27

zero-one wrote:

I understand what you're trying to say, but it has always been harder to set up a long range shot than a
short range one. a lot of factors come in to play, the enemy has more time to evade, you need more energy,
there are more ways to spoof BVR missiles.

I also understand that we have come a long way from the days of Vietnam and that BVR technology today is a world away from what it used to. But I don't think we have come to the point yet where the AMRAAM can match, let alone exceed the reliability of the sidewinder.

The F-14 was probably the best American 4th gen for BVR in the 90s, maybe better than the Eagle due to the APG-71, AAX-1 and Aim-54 Phoenix combos. but even with such advancements the Aim-54 never had a successful kill,(it had a mission kill though) but with simple Sidewinders, all targets were downed.

To me this is what makes American fighters great, they are usually designed for BVR with WVR requirements usually being secondary, but event that secondary requirement surpasses the WVR capabilities of most fighters.


The big difference between the F-14 and F-35, is that bad guys knew the F-14 was there, and shooting at them. With the F-35, they'll know they're under attack, when the AMRAAM goes active.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7753
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post02 Aug 2016, 20:47

Given that Ms Seck cited the original press release as her source, it's obvious that she deliberately altered the language about the AMRAAM portion to try and shine a bad light on the F-35.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21389
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post02 Aug 2016, 20:50

Over on previous page 'zero-one' insisted: "...which is why a mis wasn't all that surprising at all....". Unbelievable.

This is the post: viewtopic.php?f=54&t=52169&p=349730&hilit=surprising#p349730
Last edited by spazsinbad on 02 Aug 2016, 21:05, edited 1 time in total.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1630
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post02 Aug 2016, 20:55

spazsinbad wrote:Over on previous page 'zero-one' insisted: "...which is why a mis wasn't all that surprising at all....". Unbelievable.


Sorry I forgot to read the part where the Aim-120 has a 100% Pk...unbelievable
Offline

bigjku

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 679
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2012, 21:00

Unread post02 Aug 2016, 20:58

zero-one wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:Over on previous page 'zero-one' insisted: "...which is why a mis wasn't all that surprising at all....". Unbelievable.


Sorry I forgot to read the part where the Aim-120 has a 100% Pk...unbelievable


No one is saying that. What they are saying is that based on the information provided what the journalist says appears to be basically dishonest. Do you disagree?
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1518
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post02 Aug 2016, 21:31

zero-one wrote:
See Iran v Iraq war 1980 - 1988.
I knew some one would notice that thats why I said "American"


I wasn't certain you were aware - the ones Iran used were also American designed and built.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2872
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post02 Aug 2016, 22:01

Bottom line, there was no miss. Just let it go.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1630
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post03 Aug 2016, 06:21

basher54321 wrote:
zero-one wrote:
See Iran v Iraq war 1980 - 1988.
I knew some one would notice that thats why I said "American"


I wasn't certain you were aware - the ones Iran used were also American designed and built.


But did you know that they didn't have APG-71 and AAX-1 like I mentioned?

I hate going against u guys here, but I'm not sure what all the fuss was about.

I wasn't insisting that the AMRAAM missed.

All I said is that if it did, that shouldn't come as a shock, with a combat Pk below 60% (albeit according to Carlo Kopp) it's a world away from the Aim-7's 11%, (some of those hits were WVR as well) it still has a good chance of missing, shooting something at BVR is hard, if it was easy, then BVR missiles would be cheap and everyone would have it.

If we will simply dismiss bad news as false without further evidence, then that makes us no different from the Flanker fan boys. Everthing negative about the Flanker is "obviously" false if you go to their pages.

But sure, since the original post did confirm that AMRAAM was suposed to be a hit, then I guess thats the more accurate report. I'll let it go.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2481
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post03 Aug 2016, 08:40

zero-one wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:Over on previous page 'zero-one' insisted: "...which is why a mis wasn't all that surprising at all....". Unbelievable.


Sorry I forgot to read the part where the Aim-120 has a 100% Pk...unbelievable


Then again, AIM-9 or no other missile has pK of 100%, that's practically impossible. According to many sources AIM-9, AIM-7 and AIM-120 have had fairly comparable kill probabilities during same time periods in actual combat against similar targets. In some cases AIM-9 has had very high pK like in Falklands, but then again there are reports and information that in other cases that has been significantly lower like this:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article1.html

Operation Desert Storm saw 86 Sidewinder missiles fired by US Navy, USAF and USMC aircraft - resulting in 13 confirmed kills (and not 12 as reported in other publications - the misquoted kill being the Fishbed kill by LCDR Fox who intended to fire a Sparrow missile but fired a Sidewinder instead. Upon noticing the absence of a smoketrail, he realized he had fired an AIM-9 and immediately launched a Sparrow. The AIM-9 got there first however):


If that is true, then AIM-9 had pK of only 15 percent in ODS.

On the other hand there is this document from pretty authoritative source: http://www.afhso.af.mil/shared/media/do ... 27-066.pdf

It states in page 115-116 that AIM-9M had pK of about 54 percent and AIM-7 had pK of 34 percent. Maybe the rest of AIM-9 missiles used were older AIM-9s like AIM-9J and AIM-9P with much inferior pK to AIM-9M. However, AIM-9M pK seems to be very close to AIM-120 pK against similar targets. I'm sure AIM-9X has superior pK to AIM-9M against similar targets, but then again AIM-120C-7 and D likely have superior pK to A and B variants used in most engagements.

One problem for combat missile kill statistics is that it's much more difficult to confirm kills in BVR engagements than WVR engagements for obvious reasons. Another thing is that BVR missiles sometimes contribute for the kill (force enemy aircraft to maneuver and thus lose energy and situational awareness) but the actual kill is made in WVR with IR seeking missile. Then BVR missile pK goes down and WVR missile up even though both were needed for the kill.

To me, it seems that fire-and-forget missiles like AMRAAM and AIM-9 have best pK regardless of BVR or WVR. SARH homing is more difficult to work as it alerts enemy about incoming attack and is more prone to effects of evasive maneuvers, ECM, radar clutter and other such things. Still, AIM-7M models had pretty decent pK historically speaking.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2481
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post03 Aug 2016, 09:06

zero-one wrote:I hate going against u guys here, but I'm not sure what all the fuss was about.

I wasn't insisting that the AMRAAM missed.

All I said is that if it did, that shouldn't come as a shock, with a combat Pk below 60% (albeit according to Carlo Kopp) it's a world away from the Aim-7's 11%, (some of those hits were WVR as well) it still has a good chance of missing, shooting something at BVR is hard, if it was easy, then BVR missiles would be cheap and everyone would have it.

If we will simply dismiss bad news as false without further evidence, then that makes us no different from the Flanker fan boys. Everthing negative about the Flanker is "obviously" false if you go to their pages.

But sure, since the original post did confirm that AMRAAM was suposed to be a hit, then I guess thats the more accurate report. I'll let it go.


We dismiss that "bad news" because all the official sources (like JPO and USAF) and reports say AMRAAM was self destructed. Another thing is the reason stated for the miss. BVR missile which doesn't work beyond visual range? That sound rather strange don't you think?
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1630
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post03 Aug 2016, 09:27

Thanks Hornetfin, points appreciated
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5609
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post03 Aug 2016, 14:14

zero-one wrote:Thanks Hornetfin, points appreciated



Stats like Hornetfinn provided were basically what I was asking for. I simply am not ready to go all along with the logic that "Everyone knows" without seeing the facts especially with the bold statement you made.

Let me see the numbers, (and no, not Kopps) then I will decide what I "know" and It has nothing to do with the F-35, and again Missiles in this case WVR vs BVR.
Choose Crews
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2389
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post04 Aug 2016, 13:00

les_paul59 wrote:the writer from DOD Buzz is obviously ignorant to how the usaf tests missiles but that's besides the point.

I think you can make a case that there is not a better equipped aircraft for a wvr engagement than an f-35 with the helmet, das, and 2 aim 9x sidewinders.


This... excellent point.

But it brings up another conundrum: Do the two 9x's negate its stealth advantage? I'd imagine only Lockheed/the Air Force knows, but I sure hope the answer is no. Or at least, I hope they're working on it?
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1630
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post04 Aug 2016, 13:31

les_paul59 wrote:the writer from DOD Buzz is obviously ignorant to how the usaf tests missiles but that's besides the point.

I think you can make a case that there is not a better equipped aircraft for a wvr engagement than an f-35 with the helmet, das, and 2 aim 9x sidewinders.


Except maybe a Raptor with a Helmet and 9X

mixelflick wrote:This... excellent point.

But it brings up another conundrum: Do the two 9x's negate its stealth advantage? I'd imagine only Lockheed/the Air Force knows, but I sure hope the answer is no. Or at least, I hope they're working on it?


I would think that adding wingtip 9Xs would increase the RCS of the F-35 but not necessarily to barn door levels just like that. It will still be harder to spot than anything out there with external weapons.

I'd say it might even be harder to spot than a clean Typhoon or Superhornet but thats just my guess
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2481
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post04 Aug 2016, 13:42

mixelflick wrote:
les_paul59 wrote:the writer from DOD Buzz is obviously ignorant to how the usaf tests missiles but that's besides the point.

I think you can make a case that there is not a better equipped aircraft for a wvr engagement than an f-35 with the helmet, das, and 2 aim 9x sidewinders.


This... excellent point.

But it brings up another conundrum: Do the two 9x's negate its stealth advantage? I'd imagine only Lockheed/the Air Force knows, but I sure hope the answer is no. Or at least, I hope they're working on it?


That question has been discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27356&hilit=brazil

I don't think two AIM-9Xs or ARAAMS are going to negate its stealth advantage, although they most likely increase RCS to some degree. I think it will still be VLO aircraft but that's impossible to prove either way and I'm sure nobody is telling us any figures anytime soon...
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests