Operational Performace Comparison: Viper, Beagle, and Stubby

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1767
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post06 Nov 2018, 08:13

wrightwing wrote:Given that F-100/110s have been tested up to ~37,500lbs of thrust, I bet F-119s could hit 50,000(or more) if TBO wasn't a consideration. That combined with a stripped Raptor=Holy Cow!!


Well, what made the Strak Eagle special was that it was an unmodified engine strapped in an unmodified airframe. It represented what the F-15 airframe powered by the Pratt and Whitney F-100 engine could do.

The P-42 is largely viewed as cheating it's way to the record books as they modified everything, even the nosecone was replaced with a lightweight material and the engines were over clocked to produce thrust levels way beyond their thrust limit. In short they did not represent the airframe/engine sciences applied to the Su-27 at all.

To me, a stripped down F-22, with no paint should be what the Streak Raptor should be.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2211
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post06 Nov 2018, 12:00

Excellent treatment of comparative perf here —

http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/201 ... 2.html?m=1
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3719
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post06 Nov 2018, 13:56

Yes, SMSGTMac's blog and Garrya's bog have been great resources
"Spurts"

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

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3719
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post19 Dec 2018, 20:04

I had to re-do my munitions wave drag modeling, and the fuel consumption on the F-15, so back to "square one" for output. In the next few weeks I should have a "finished" sample that will include only the F-15SA and the Su-35S. After that it is the repetitive process of modeling new planes. I'm looking forward to being done.
"Spurts"

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

garrya

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 633
  • Joined: 25 Dec 2015, 12:43

Unread post20 Dec 2018, 03:31

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:I had to re-do my munitions wave drag modeling, and the fuel consumption on the F-15, so back to "square one" for output.

What? why?
btw where do you get the data for Su-35
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3719
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post20 Dec 2018, 13:49

All the output numbers changed once I changed the munitions drag modeling and the fuel burn modeling. I have to rerun the individual scenarios now.

The only data I can get for the Su-35S is derived from the brochure, the Su-27 flight manual, and the MiG-29 flight manual. It isn't much, but it's more than what's available for any relevant threat aircraft.
"Spurts"

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

swiss

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 234
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post22 Dec 2018, 22:44

I'm really curious, about your results Spurts. :thumb:
Offline

chucky2

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2016, 20:27

Unread post23 Dec 2018, 04:20

Sure would be nice to have official F-15QA and/or the proposed F-15X numbers (why they're single seating that though is strange)...
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2578
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post23 Dec 2018, 17:57

chucky2 wrote:Sure would be nice to have official F-15QA and/or the proposed F-15X numbers (why they're single seating that though is strange)...


On the F-15X, I agree.

Presumably and as a selling point, "multi-role" will likely be a part of the vocabulary. The big question is if the new "fly by wire", sensors and systems really allow for 1 crew member to effectively prosecute air to ground targets. Will be amazing if they pull it off.

I LOVE the idea of the F-15X (the weapons/systems), but it makes no sense. Any F-35 is going to be superior air to air or air to ground than the F-15X, and probably come in at a lower price point. Makes much more sense to just build more F-35's IMO...
Offline

chucky2

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2016, 20:27

Unread post24 Dec 2018, 01:30

Well, they made note that the ADCP II computer they added a couple years back was arguably the fastest processor in any fighter aircraft, so one would think if the F-35 can power all its sensors internally without any additional power and/or cooling solutions, that something like F-15X ought to as well (especially given the price tag).

I sorta expected more really. Internal sensors a la F-22/F-35, a second crew station to resolve all the information coming in (one of the reoccurring comments from pilots on F-35 is easy plane to fly but lots of information to manage). Internal gateway to communicate with both 4th and 5th Gen assets. Boeing has had enough time to look at what was delivered with F-22 and F-35, and provide a peer solution with F-15 Advanced. Seems like they're just comfortable putting advanced lipstick on a sexy pig and calling that good enough. In the past, might be...but not $15M more than the hotter competition...
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21926
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post24 Dec 2018, 02:23

'chucky2' said:
"... (one of the reoccurring comments from pilots on F-35 is easy plane to fly but lots of information to manage)…"

Perhaps, however I think you have the wrong idea about what they have been saying. Sure there is a lot more information and it is presented on one screen and it is easier to manage compared to many screens of old non-fused data aircraft. An F-35 pilot has to learn different skills (compared to a legacy pilot) however said pilot has more time to devote to them.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2578
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post24 Dec 2018, 14:16

Yeah, it seems the two crewmember fighter is dead, at least in the USAF. The Navy is a little more accommodating, but even there there will be no F-35D two seater. And they're talking about PCA being "optionally manned", so that says single seat to me as well..
Offline

chucky2

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2016, 20:27

Unread post24 Dec 2018, 16:08

Perhaps, but I didn't take their comments that way. They made it sound like dealing with all the information available at once was the challenging part of F-35. Then again, which is the worse sum as far as leveraging to.maximum degree what the F-35 can provide: a single crew dealing with flying the jet and operating and interpreting all the sensors and processing all that I formation and making decisions based off it and then executing them - but no cross talk or delay between crewmembers, or, two cremembers splitting duties but having to coordinate and communicate amongst themselves?

To me it sounds like F-35 pilots wouldn't mind someone else up there helping, even given the automation and system synergy, but perhaps I'm wrong and they'd prefer to solo it. The question to them (F-35 operators) would be: if we could immediately add another crew member up there at virtually no penalty to your current aircraft, snap of the fingers quick (no redesign, all work has been done we can just build it), would you want them or not? Because that's where we are with F-15...Boeing can pump out single or dual seaters as needed. Given they're building duals for the Saudis and for the Quataris, got to think it'd be very little effort to provide dual seat F-15X...
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21926
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post24 Dec 2018, 17:09

'chucky2' I think you have the wrong idea about the sensor fusion along with the F-35 to F-35 communication of the COP Common Operating Picture via MADL. Sensor Fusion takes a big burden away from the F-35 pilot. The TSD Tactical Situation Display can be modified at will or not seen altogether depending on the situation. This display can be complex or simple at pilot whim or need. The COP is shared without pilot intervention - not even a radio call - the lead F-35 pilot can designate tasks to another F-35 pilot by finger on PCD Panoramic Cockpit Display or button on throttle or stick - no radio.

Sure the new F-35 pilot (with experience on other aircraft) has a period of adjustment but all say they don't want to go back - new pilots have a different learning curve whilst very experienced OLD pilots having adjusted to the F-35 often state that these 'new' F-35 pilots are the ones that will innovate to learn how to use the F-35 to the best of their, and the aircraft ability, as single aircraft and in tactical formations and along with the fourth generation jets which they help.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

chucky2

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 08 Jul 2016, 20:27

Unread post24 Dec 2018, 18:57

I get that, but what I thought they were effectively saying was that because each F-35 sucks up so much information itself, then fuses that picture of its own data not only with its flight but of other shared data, that the information overload is real...kept only at bay by automation. It doesn't help if your F-35 is receiving A through ZZZ, if you have to dumb it down so you're seeing and thus only having to process up through M, you're not getting the full benefit of the platform.

I'm happy to be wrong though, as that meand not only is the info not too much for pilots to handle, but that a second person isn't needed, which means less crew demands as far as provisioning, training, and sustaining.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests