Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 18:26
by asianviper
An interesting article about what happened when an F-35A met an F-16d in a dogfight exercise.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-p ... db9d11a875

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 18:32
by SpudmanWP
um... Search much?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 18:35
by sprstdlyscottsmn
This has already been discussed ad nauseum in other threads about how AXE makes up stories with "unnamed sources" to slam the F-35. If there is not a named source, it's probably a lie.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 18:52
by eloise
asianviper wrote:An interesting article about what happened when an F-35A met an F-16d in a dogfight exercise.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-p ... db9d11a875


if you read the article, you will found that the amount of bullshit inside that are just :doh: :doh:
for example :
the unnamed pilot wrote in a scathing five-page brief that War Is Boring has obtained

an unnamed pilot? really?, and some how a civilian website owner can obtain top secret military test brief ?

the nose rate was slow, allowing him to easily time his jink prior to a gun solution,” the JSF pilot complained.

what??? does f-16 have some psychic ability that they know when f-35 about to fire so that he can " time his jink " ?

the JSF flier discovered he couldn’t even comfortably move his head inside the radar-evading jet’s cramped cockpit. “The helmet was too large for the space inside the canopy to adequately see behind the aircraft.” That allowed the F-16 to sneak up on him

who is the retard that actually write this?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 18:54
by newmanfrigan
Yep. It's a steaming pile of crap.

..but we already have a thread on this. Should delete this one.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 19:33
by spazsinbad
'asianviper' much earlier 'gabriele' posted that article and a long discussion started on this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186&p=293887&hilit=unnamed#p293887

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 22:56
by sergei
"and some how a civilian website owner can obtain top secret military test brief ?"
New Snowden ?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 23:10
by checksixx
Started reading it, but when I hit the outright lie, I stopped. Anyone that's actually in the know, will know the exact point the lie is uttered and why it's an outright lie. The article is garbage.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 02:25
by eloise
sergei wrote:"and some how a civilian website owner can obtain top secret military test brief ?"
New Snowden ?

Edward Joseph "Ed" Snowden (born June 21, 1983) is an American computer professional, former CIA employee, and government contractor

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 02:37
by XanderCrews
checksixx wrote:Started reading it, but when I hit the outright lie, I stopped. Anyone that's actually in the know, will know the exact point the lie is uttered and why it's an outright lie. The article is garbage.


You will never guess what I am curious about...

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 02:57
by checksixx
XanderCrews wrote:
checksixx wrote:Started reading it, but when I hit the outright lie, I stopped. Anyone that's actually in the know, will know the exact point the lie is uttered and why it's an outright lie. The article is garbage.


You will never guess what I am curious about...


I couldn't care less what you're curious about.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 03:19
by spazsinbad
'checksixx' what is going on? Why be so coy?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 04:21
by optimist
I think the lies start in the second para' with the first quote on WVR guns
“The F-35 was at a distinct energy disadvantage,”

It was said the subsonic acceleration of the f-35 is about equal envelope to the f-22 and therefore the f-15 and would out energy the f-16 with tanks

"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. "

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 04:39
by spazsinbad
I'LL NOT BE COY - A MUCH BETTER INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION IS HERE AND HAS BEEN GOING FOR SOME TIME ALREADY:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186&p=293887&hilit=unnamed#p293887

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 09:05
by asianviper
Sorry if this was already discussed. I just read it the other day and thought it was an interesting read. So what is the truth? Is the F35 a capable dog fighter or simply a very smart networked fighter bomber with a secondary air to air capablility? Im fascinated by this aircraft and hope it lives up to its price tag. the avionics and sensor fusion sound amazing but can it mix it up close with an agile foe? Im not here to upset or troll anyone im just interested in your honest and learned opinions.

Thanks everyone

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 09:19
by spazsinbad
Why not read this forum link below - where there are several pages of discussion already - and pose your question there as well as read what has been posted there for some time? Not many people want to repeat things over & over & over....
'gabriele': 30 Jun 2015 05:19
"How convenient: War is Boring supposedly has a damning 5-page report on the mock dogfight which proves the F-35 is terrible. We can't see the document, of course, and the test pilot who wrote it is "unnamed".

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186&p=293887&hilit=unnamed#p293887

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 17:00
by fang

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 18:33
by jjk


So LM does not deny the report and the observations in it, but made some excuses that AF-2 had old software.

Then LM continues:

LM wrote:There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology.


Now I wonder were these a simulations in computers or a simulation in the air?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 18:42
by SpudmanWP
Don't confuse the JPO with LM.

The JPO is not going to get into a lengthy discussion of how DAxe is wrong, that's our job :roll:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 19:03
by fabri91

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 19:08
by jjk
SpudmanWP wrote:Don't confuse the JPO with LM.

I don't, I just quoted a previous post. Although I'm a bit concerned about the little difference between JPO and LM.

SpudmanWP wrote:The JPO is not going to get into a lengthy discussion of how DAxe is wrong, that's our job

Who belongs to 'our' in quoted sentence?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 19:23
by XanderCrews
jjk wrote:


So LM does not deny the report and the observations in it, but made some excuses that AF-2 had old software.

Then LM continues:

LM wrote:There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology.


Now I wonder were these a simulations in computers or a simulation in the air?


Many real life air to air tests have been carried out including some in Southern AZ. Even live weapons have been fired at air targets.

Where is LM's statement?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 19:37
by SpudmanWP
jjk wrote:
Who belongs to 'our' in quoted sentence?
Fanboiz :mrgreen:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 20:14
by jjk
XanderCrews wrote:
jjk wrote:

So LM does not deny the report and the observations in it, but made some excuses that AF-2 had old software.

Where is LM's statement?


I'm not sure but http://www.f35.com seems to be a LM website.


XanderCrews wrote:
jjk wrote:
LM wrote:There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology.


Now I wonder were these a simulations in computers or a simulation in the air?


Many real life air to air tests have been carried out including some in Southern AZ. Even live weapons have been fired at air targets.


Cool, but were those four-ship F-35 vs F-16 computer simulations or simulations in air?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 20:24
by XanderCrews
In air. Also in what planet does a website quoting someone else make them one in the same?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Jul 2015, 20:54
by jjk
XanderCrews wrote:In air.

Says who?
XanderCrews wrote:Also in what planet does a website quoting someone else make them one in the same?

Despite the title there is no reference/link to the source, it looks like the JPO and LM are the same....

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 00:05
by agilefalcon16
Hmm. The fact that JPO starts by saying, "The media report on the F-35 and F-16 flight does not tell the entire story." at the very least gives *some* credence to the report I would think.

Furthermore this segment is also interesting,

"The F-35's technology is designed to engage, shoot, and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual "dogfighting" situations. There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology."

Nowhere is it claimed the F-35 is in fact a more maneuverable plane. Yes the F-35 (obviously) has a substantial edge BVR, but that isn't the point behind the report. If the 40 year old F-16 does indeed outmaneuver it's trillion dollar replacement at various speeds, that is still significant.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 00:22
by quicksilver
agilefalcon16 wrote: If the 40 year old F-16 does indeed outmaneuver it's trillion dollar replacement at various speeds, that is still significant.


Really? Explain to us how that is significant.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 01:27
by XanderCrews
Says who?


The JPO


Despite the title there is no reference/link to the source, it looks like the JPO and LM are the same....


It is nearly impossible you are this oblivious LOL

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 01:28
by XanderCrews
agilefalcon16 wrote:Hmm. The fact that JPO starts by saying, "The media report on the F-35 and F-16 flight does not tell the entire story." at the very least gives *some* credence to the report I would think.

Furthermore this segment is also interesting,

"The F-35's technology is designed to engage, shoot, and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual "dogfighting" situations. There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology."

Nowhere is it claimed the F-35 is in fact a more maneuverable plane. Yes the F-35 (obviously) has a substantial edge BVR, but that isn't the point behind the report. If the 40 year old F-16 does indeed outmaneuver it's trillion dollar replacement at various speeds, that is still significant.


Did you read the report itself?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 01:48
by agilefalcon16
quicksilver wrote:
agilefalcon16 wrote: If the 40 year old F-16 does indeed outmaneuver it's trillion dollar replacement at various speeds, that is still significant.


Really? Explain to us how that is significant.


If handling characteristics aren't significant, why is a new fighter aircraft needed at all? Why not have made it a dedicated attacker like the F-117? Would have been a hell of a lot simpler, and a hell of a lot cheaper. I don't want to hear how legacy aircraft are getting old and new replacing. There are cheaper ways to address the issue than by throwing $1.5 trillion at it....

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 01:54
by spazsinbad
Methinks that 1.5trill is in your head - something like tinnitus probably. And for the rest - not only are US Armed Forces requiring the F-35 variants but also a bunch of other 'armed forces' - so there is that.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 02:02
by XanderCrews
agilefalcon16 wrote:
quicksilver wrote:
agilefalcon16 wrote: If the 40 year old F-16 does indeed outmaneuver it's trillion dollar replacement at various speeds, that is still significant.


Really? Explain to us how that is significant.


If handling characteristics aren't significant, why is a new fighter aircraft needed at all? Why not have made it a dedicated attacker like the F-117? Would have been a hell of a lot simpler, and a hell of a lot cheaper. I don't want to hear how legacy aircraft are getting old and new replacing. There are cheaper ways to address the issue than by throwing $1.5 trillion at it....


https://comprehensiveinformation.wordpress.com/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 03:12
by agilefalcon16


That link is indeed a good compilation of information, however I never suggested the plane isn't a capable aircraft. It certainly will be. I was just stating that - considering the extreme cost of the program in its entirety - the fact that this multirole fighter can do all that it can do, yet cannot do so while simultaneously (and impressively) out-flying its still quite potent 40 year old multirole predecessor, is still a bit disheartening. (In my opinion)

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 03:18
by quicksilver
agilefalcon16 wrote:
quicksilver wrote:
agilefalcon16 wrote: If the 40 year old F-16 does indeed outmaneuver it's trillion dollar replacement at various speeds, that is still significant.


Really? Explain to us how that is significant.


If handling characteristics aren't significant, why is a new fighter aircraft needed at all? Why not have made it a dedicated attacker like the F-117? Would have been a hell of a lot simpler, and a hell of a lot cheaper. I don't want to hear how legacy aircraft are getting old and new replacing. There are cheaper ways to address the issue than by throwing $1.5 trillion at it....


Wow. 1.5 trillion eh? Where exactly does that number come from? What's included in that number?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 07:09
by jjk
XanderCrews wrote:
Says who?

The JPO


No the JPO (or for that matter LM) says:
There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology.


They could not equip one F-35 with sensors and software for dog fighting simulations in the air, so I wonder if those four-ship simulations with sensors, weapons, and stealth technology were in the air or in computers.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 07:18
by SpudmanWP
You do know the difference between a "Flight Sciences", a "Mission Systems", and a "Production" F-35.. right?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 08:48
by spazsinbad
Sometimes the diffs can be 'hazy' according to this story but anyway best read it all for subtleties... Looks as though this is a reprint of a CODE ONE article so likely found there also. The article is long so only the first few paragraphs below.
F-35 Flight Test Perspectives: Testing The Lightning II
01 Feb 2009 Carl Chance

"..., pushed, poked, and prodded during this phase. The flyable aircraft fall into two basic categories: flight sciences and mission systems.

Flight sciences aircraft are used to expand the flight envelope. The nine flight sciences aircraft are composed of four F-35A conventional takeoff and landing, or CTOL, aircraft (including the first aircraft, called AA-1, which was manufactured before the results of a weight reduction program were applied to the F-35 design); three F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing, or STOVL, variants; and two F-35C carrier variant aircraft. These aircraft will be used to evaluate flying qualities, stability and control, high angle of attack, environmental systems, propulsion, flutter, loads, dynamic response, and store separation.

Mission systems aircraft are used to test systems not associated with expanding the flight envelope. The four mission systems test aircraft, divided into one F-35A, two F-35Bs, and one F-35C, will focus on interoperability, stores integration, and avionics integration. Systems associated with mission systems testing include communications (datalinks and satellite communications), distributed apertures, and electro-optical targeting. Testing of the F-35’s active electronically scanned array radar, helmet-mounted displays, avionics associated with navigation and identification, and multifunction displays will also be done with the mission systems aircraft....

...The delineations between flight sciences and mission systems testing are not as strict as they may sound. Weapon integration, for example, involves both flight sciences and mission systems aircraft. Test drops for clearing a particular weapon for a specific variant of the F-35 involve flight sciences aircraft. Testing that evaluates how well systems on the aircraft help the pilot identify targets or how accurately a weapon is delivered to the target involves mission systems aircraft....

Source: http://www.wingsoverkansas.com/features/a1000/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 09:30
by Corsair1963
This was posted on DOD Buzz by Curt

Really, put's what happen into layman terms.....


Of course the JPO even missed the most important aspect.

The F-35 was specifically testing high angle of attack according to the report. It was not dogfighting in the sense that the F-35 pilot could do anything he wanted, but testing potential dogfighting methods using high AoA and large control changes. Reading comprehension must be dead in the world today. Since the F-35 can fly to 50deg AoA while the F-16 is limited to between 15-25 depending on Gs being pulled, they were not even testing the full capability of the plane, just a part of the envelope. Because, you know, it was a test flight to see how the plane reacts to high AoA and large control surface deflection. Don't believe me, read the first paragraph of the report. To extrapolate that to saying the F-35 cannot dogfight a F-16 is like saying that because the Zero was a better dogfighter than any allied fighter in WWII at 180kts, it was better period. The allies quickly learned to dogfight at 250kts where the Zero sucked and absolutely crushed them, even in F4Fs. Without knowing anything else about the maneuvering envelope, you don't know anywhere near enough to claim anything. And of course, it was a test flight. The test aircraft lacked much of the avionics suite of a production F-35.

"However, despite the F-35’s technologies and next-generation sensors – the JPO statements did not seem to necessarily contradict the central finding of the test-pilot’s assessment that, in terms of pure dogfighting maneuverability as its own variable, the F-35 did not perform as well as an F-16"

Maybe because that is not what the Test Pilot actually said. That is what David Axe said, taking the test pilots remarks out of context. What the test pilot said, was at high AoA, you know, what they were actually testing in this exercise, the fighter needed more pitch control and also recommended the changing the blended regime for high AoA to more than 30 degrees. He also recommended a bunch of changes to the control laws to make the aircraft more responsive, since you know that was the purpose of the test. Finally, he said there was no benefit to utilizing that flight regime. This is kind of like saying there is no benefit to dogfighting a Zero at 180kts. He did note that there was plenty of stability and maneuverability, but the control laws delayed the required response. Of course, the obvious answer is to change the control laws but that is just too much to process for most people I guess.

David Axe was kind enough to post the entire report, it's worth reading. Just for laughs, try reading it first and then read what David Axe wrote. As expected, it really doesn't say what he wants it to say.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 11:14
by rotosequence
Why is this supposed to matter? The F-16 was literally built to dogfight, and the F-35 is a tri-service strike fighter, and isn't optimized for extreme maneuverability. Was anyone expecting the F-35 to offer superior kinematics over the F-16? :?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 14:11
by XanderCrews
agilefalcon16 wrote:


That link is indeed a good compilation of information, however I never suggested the plane isn't a capable aircraft. It certainly will be. I was just stating that - considering the extreme cost of the program in its entirety - the fact that this multirole fighter can do all that it can do, yet cannot do so while simultaneously (and impressively) out-flying its still quite potent 40 year old multirole predecessor, is still a bit disheartening. (In my opinion)


I'm guessing there were and are things that in certain flight regimens (which is a critical piece of this puzzle if you read the report) the F-4 outperforms F-16. But we don't regret the change over.

jjk wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
Says who?

The JPO


No the JPO (or for that matter LM) says:
There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology.


They could not equip one F-35 with sensors and software for dog fighting simulations in the air, so I wonder if those four-ship simulations with sensors, weapons, and stealth technology were in the air or in computers.


I really can't tell if you are trolling or if you really are this clueless. If its the second I will be glad to help. If its the first, you need to find better ways to occupy your time.

Seeing as you don't seem to understand the 4 V 4 Simulations, its sadly looking like the first. You do realize that the F-35 is only weeks away from being operational right? And that different F-35s are used to test and measure different things?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 14:34
by agilefalcon16
quicksilver wrote:
Wow. 1.5 trillion eh? Where exactly does that number come from? What's included in that number?


http://www.cnbc.com/id/101883138

Even if the costs don't quite reach 1.5 trill (since that number likely assumes inflation expectations, etc)... even if it ends up being "only" 1 trillion. That is a huge amount of money for anything.... especially for a fighter. To put that number into perspective.... the Large Hadron Collider (most largest, most expensive experimental facility ever built) built by CERN.... was "only" about 12 billion. Just over 1/100 of the cost of this jet.... This is comparing apples to oranges I know, but still....

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 14:50
by sprstdlyscottsmn
The biggest complaint about the agility from that test was that the software was not giving the pilot what he wanted and the pilot even said the CLAW can be changed as the departure resistance and recovery tests showed what the plane could really do. He said several times in that report that the plane was never at it's limits. He also said buffet was a non-issue was was actually useful as a communication tool between the plane and pilot. Buffet did NOT impact the HMD in any way.

He says that the E-M isn't favorable at 20-28 degrees AoA (regime being tested). Well, seeing as how favorable E-M on a Viper occurs at 18 degrees or less, big deal. The E-M may be very different at 15-18 degrees. It may not. We already know the current engine CAN be trimmed for about 20% more thrust if the E-M thing is REALLY a big deal across the board.

As for the Helmet. That may be an issue. It may not. We do know this plane did not have DAS. We don't know how DAS operates in a dogfight. That it is difficult for the pilot to turn around is disheartening, but for all we do or don't know there is a DAS HMD symbology that gives the pilot that view of the bogey.

The report is quite telling for what it does say, but it doesn't actually say much.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 14:54
by popcorn
The investment in the F-35 is to effect the recapitalization of legacy jet fleets of the Armed Forces comprising thousands of aircraft. Without that context, you're just counting beans.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 15:02
by sferrin
agilefalcon16 wrote:
quicksilver wrote:
Wow. 1.5 trillion eh? Where exactly does that number come from? What's included in that number?


http://www.cnbc.com/id/101883138

Even if the costs don't quite reach 1.5 trill (since that number likely assumes inflation expectations, etc)... even if it ends up being "only" 1 trillion. That is a huge amount of money for anything.... especially for a fighter. To put that number into perspective....


To put that number into perspective. . .that's about the same as the F-15 program. Now compare the number of jets and years planned to operate.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 16:34
by borg
So how many F-35A will the USAF get?
I read somewhere that it is not truly decided on the number.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 17:09
by sferrin
borg wrote:So how many F-35A will the USAF get?
I read somewhere that it is not truly decided on the number.


1700+

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 17:12
by lamoey
That the F-35 is compared to the F-16 is natural and unavoidable. If for no other reason that the F-35 will replace the F-16 with most of the customers. We can argue that they are designed for different tasks, but at the end of the day the F-35 is for these customers partly the evolution of the F-16. Even for me, that ought to know better, it was not nice to read the report and I have had to take a step back to try to digest its content. There are certainly challenges in the report where some will be harder than others to rectify.

Maneuverability: My take on this part is that the flight control system configuration on the AF-2 was basically running with the training wheels still attached (until spin recovery kicked in). The pilot wanted more than he was given, and his explanation of the pronounced reaction when spin recovery kicked in, indicates that the training wheels can be lifted a few more inches off the ground. To me this is all relatively easy to fix. It just takes a few tweaks in a "spreadsheet" and a few tests to get closer to the limits without overdoing it.

Energy Management: We know from GUM that few, if any, fighter has better energy management than the F-16, and this is mainly due to the AOA limiter that stops the pilot from loosing too much energy and decent T/W margins. The control laws in the F-35 must have some form of EM functionality, while also allowing for rapid pitch changes for a quick high AOA missile or gun shot. It appears that EM is not the top priority in the control laws at this stage, but rather to keep stable, no surprise, flight. While it is not easy, or cheap, to get increased power, it may be possible to improve control laws to help the pilot avoid loss of energy, but this is a trade-off that describes the difference between the F-16 and the FA-18.

Cockpit space: We can almost explain the difference between the F-35 and the F-16 cockpits as an upside-down U and V. Possibly for radiation reflection angle reason the F-35 has the upside-down V shape. The taller the pilot is, and the wider the helmet is, the less space he has available to move around in a V shaped versus a U shaped canopy top. Can he move his seat further down, like in the F-16? Other than that only a smaller helmet (or perhaps a less big-headed pilot 8) ) can solve this problem, since I doubt they can easily change the shape of the canopy. In one video I saw I thought the helmet was very close to the canopy roof. Will the F-22 have the same problem if/when they get the HMC with its V shaped canopy?

Avionics: It is clearly stated that the AF-2 has few or none of the gismos to alert the pilot that he is getting in to trouble, but that was not the point of this test. Sooner or later an F-35 will get in to this situation and they need all the answers to shape tactics and possibly engineer changes to minimize the problem area.

Conclusion: Get the training wheels off and find ways to aid the pilot in managing his/her energy better.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 17:18
by XanderCrews
agilefalcon16 wrote:
quicksilver wrote:
Wow. 1.5 trillion eh? Where exactly does that number come from? What's included in that number?


http://www.cnbc.com/id/101883138

Even if the costs don't quite reach 1.5 trill (since that number likely assumes inflation expectations, etc)... even if it ends up being "only" 1 trillion. That is a huge amount of money for anything.... especially for a fighter. To put that number into perspective.... the Large Hadron Collider (most largest, most expensive experimental facility ever built) built by CERN.... was "only" about 12 billion. Just over 1/100 of the cost of this jet.... This is comparing apples to oranges I know, but still....



Thats including lifetime cost. IE the cost to run over 2400 airplanes for over 4 decades.

People also already extrapolated the cost of multiple programs without the commonality benefits. over 4 decades, and it was over 2 trillion IIRC

No one ever calculated a weapon system for that amount of time before. You imagine the sticker shock if the same had been tried when the F-16 was in development. :doh:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 17:31
by bring_it_on
Thats including lifetime cost. IE the cost to run over 2400 airplanes for over 4 decades.


And its in then year dollars..

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:10
by Dragon029
lamoey wrote:Cockpit space: We can almost explain the difference between the F-35 and the F-16 cockpits as an upside-down U and V. Possibly for radiation reflection angle reason the F-35 has the upside-down V shape. The taller the pilot is, and the wider the helmet is, the less space he has available to move around in a V shaped versus a U shaped canopy top. Can he move his seat further down, like in the F-16? Other than that only a smaller helmet (or perhaps a less big-headed pilot 8) ) can solve this problem, since I doubt they can easily change the shape of the canopy. In one video I saw I thought the helmet was very close to the canopy roof. Will the F-22 have the same problem if/when they get the HMC with its V shaped canopy?


The model in this flight sim (Prepar3D) is quite accurate - in the 2nd and 3rd images I've drawn a little red line to indicate roughly the size of the gap between the headrest and canopy.

It's not too bad though; you can see from the first photo that you have an alright view rearward, but that photo is taken as if the pilot is an owl, meaning that he'd have a little bit more visibility to the rear-sides.

Purely vertically, I don't think there's much of an issue (see this image for example):

Image

While I'm sure they have good ergonomic and safety-related reasons to have the headrest as wide as it is, I think they could trim it's width by about 30% and still have a safely sized headrest. One suggestion I heard and like is having the outer cushions swing back at command (even possibly as an automatic process when the pilot looks more than a certain angle to the side (as measured by HMDS sensors); it'd mean more points of failure / some extra complexity, but it wouldn't be that dramatic.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:31
by johnwill
Unless I dropped a decimal point somewhere, a trillion dollars over fifty years will cost every American less then twenty cents a day. Think we can afford that?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:42
by spazsinbad
'sprstdlyscottsmn' said over on previous page: "...We don't know how DAS operates in a dogfight...." QUE? Has not this aspect been explained quite a few times (probably in bits and pieces in various threads over time) particularly in the AVIONICS forum subsection in the HMDS thread? DAS keeps track of everyone - good and bad - within at least WVR range - all the time; whilst fusion tells the pilot which is the most threatening bogies etc. vHUD in HMDS gives all round view - not only just where pilot looks but a switch provides the rear view as required NOT MUCH HEAD TURNIN' REQ'D. IT IS SAD that there are two threads on this 'ohno not another "F-35 can't dogfight" crap' but this OTHER THREAD is more informative:

START HERE for vHUD: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186&p=294040&hilit=vHud#p294040

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:44
by spazsinbad
'Dragon029' the 'headrest' wings are part of the ejection seat system that inflate, to provide a 'catchers mitt' for the pilot helmet, and to slowly deflate to cushion the backwards force of windblast on the helmet at high speed; thus preserving pilot existence in extremis. There are explanations about this effect - if required. Here is an example:
Bang Seat Battle
16 Sep 2010 Bill Sweetman

"...The JSF's helmet-mounted display, for all the sophistication of its engineering, is heavier and more forward-weighted than a standard helmet. The result is that the pilot's head tips forward on ejection [all heads are forced forward initially by the upwards force of ejection going UP the rail - doh]: the concern is not just the forward tip itself, but the slam-back effect as the seat hits the airstream and a 550-knot windblast forces the pilot's head against the seat.

Visible for the first time at AFA was Martin-Baker's solution to the problem: an airbag system stowed in the headrest, which deploys to either side of the pilot's head, preventing lateral movement, and then controls the slam-back by deflating at a fixed rate...." [ORIGINAL URL NOT LONGER WORKING SO FORUM URL BELOW INSTEAD]

Source: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186&p=294040&hilit=vHud#p294040

One sometimes GOOD secondary effect of the OLD primary upper ejection handle (of two - with now the only one between pilot legs) which when pulled over the pilot helmet helped protect from windblast; but COULD aid keeping the head up (but it all depends on a lot of factors so it is not a big deal in the scenario of saving pilot life in extreme circumstances). Anyway here is info about how the F-35 pilot is NOT GOING TO KEEP HIS HEAD UP during ejection sequence.
How it Works: The F-35’s Martin-Baker Ejection Seat
17 Jun 2015 LM PR

"...Aircraft ejection is a jarring acceleration of approximately 12-14 G-forces, or gravitational forces, to quickly separate the man or woman from the machine...."

Source: https://www.f35.com/news/detail/how-it- ... ction-seat


Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:44
by quicksilver
jjk wrote:
They could not equip one F-35 with sensors and software for dog fighting simulations in the air, so I wonder if those four-ship simulations with sensors, weapons, and stealth technology were in the air or in computers.


They equip and instrument each test aircraft for a specific set of test activities -- AF-2 has been the 'loads' aircraft.

The 4v4 was air breathers versus air breathers and the F-16s never even saw the F-35s.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:47
by bring_it_on
spazsinbad wrote:'sprstdlyscottsmn' said over on previous page: "...We don't know how DAS operates in a dogfight...." QUE? Has not this aspect been explained quite a few times (probably in bits and pieces in various threads over time) particularly in the AVIONICS forum subsection in the HMDS thread? DAS keeps track of everyone - good and bad - within at least WVR range - all the time; whilst fusion tells the pilot which is the most threatening bogies etc. vHUD in HMDS gives all round view - not only just where pilot looks but a switch provides the rear view as required NOT MUCH HEAD TURNIN' REQ'D. IT IS SAD that there are two threads on this 'ohno not another "F-35 can't dogfight" crap' but this OTHER THREAD is more informative:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186&p=294064&hilit=vHud#p294064


It would be a good exercise to compile all this into one PDF document.I'll try to put something together...

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:48
by quicksilver
agilefalcon16 wrote:
quicksilver wrote:
Wow. 1.5 trillion eh? Where exactly does that number come from? What's included in that number?


http://www.cnbc.com/id/101883138

Even if the costs don't quite reach 1.5 trill (since that number likely assumes inflation expectations, etc)... even if it ends up being "only" 1 trillion. That is a huge amount of money for anything.... especially for a fighter. To put that number into perspective.... the Large Hadron Collider (most largest, most expensive experimental facility ever built) built by CERN.... was "only" about 12 billion. Just over 1/100 of the cost of this jet.... This is comparing apples to oranges I know, but still....


I'll take that as 'you don't know' and therefore you have no basis to assess whether that is significant or not, relative to anything.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 18:51
by quicksilver
"Thats including lifetime cost. IE the cost to run over 2400 airplanes for over 4 decades."

It's actually a 55 year estimate iirc, and 40% of it is inflation.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 19:54
by XanderCrews
quicksilver wrote:"Thats including lifetime cost. IE the cost to run over 2400 airplanes for over 4 decades."

It's actually a 55 year estimate iirc, and 40% of it is inflation.


Thank you for the correction 8)

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 19:58
by XanderCrews
johnwill wrote:Unless I dropped a decimal point somewhere, a trillion dollars over fifty years will cost every American less then twenty cents a day. Think we can afford that?


Nice :D

more comparison

Image

^This isn't including the $500 billion+ the US spends every year on defence.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 20:04
by hb_pencil
johnwill wrote:Unless I dropped a decimal point somewhere, a trillion dollars over fifty years will cost every American less then twenty cents a day. Think we can afford that?



Did you account for population growth? The U.S. population is projected to hit 400 million by 2050, up from around 300 million today. So really, its probably going to be about 15 cents per day.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 21:02
by sferrin
Here ya go:

From the May 23rd, 2011 issue of AvWeek:

"even though the cost to sustain the program into the future is an eye-popping $1 trillion, adjusted for inflation over its lifespan. That is less than the cost to sustain the F-22, about the same as the F-15, and more than either the F-16 or the F-18."

HOWEVER. That's every penny related to the purchase or use of every US F-35 planned. So a comparison to JUST the F-16 or JUST the F/A-18 wouldn't be meaningful. You'd have to add together the F-16, F/A-18, and Harrier programs to have an apples-to-apples comparison.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 21:38
by spazsinbad
Senators Ask For JSF Alternatives
20 May 2011 Jen DiMascio | Aerospace Daily & Defense Report

"...Ashton Carter, who says the Pentagon has no good alternative to the next-generation stealthy fighter, even though the cost to sustain the program into the future is an eye-popping $1 trillion, adjusted for inflation over its lifespan. That is less than the cost to sustain the F-22, about the same as the F-15, and more than either the F-16 or the F-18.

Carter is pledging the amount will be brought down during a “should-cost” review of the program that he will finish in the next couple of months....

...Asked about the costs, Tom Burbage, Lockheed Martin’s general manager for F-35 program integration, says that the next-generation fighter’s sustainment costs cannot be fairly compared to older aircraft.

He says JSF sustainment was developed on a performance-based logistics plan different than legacy sustainment processes. The JSF’s O&S estimates also go out to 2065 and are susceptible to ground rules that legacy aircraft are not bound to, he adds...."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/awin/senators-a ... ternatives

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Jul 2015, 23:49
by johnwill
hb_pencil wrote:
johnwill wrote:Unless I dropped a decimal point somewhere, a trillion dollars over fifty years will cost every American less then twenty cents a day. Think we can afford that?



Did you account for population growth? The U.S. population is projected to hit 400 million by 2050, up from around 300 million today. So really, its probably going to be about 15 cents per day.


You are right of course. But, I didn't. It was so much simpler to say "less than twenty cents a day". Oops, I said, "less then twenty cents a day".

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2015, 00:12
by lamoey
Here is the response from the Norwegian F-35 Project Office: English version published today

Dogfighting and the F-35
By Morten Hanche

Recently I have been working on a post on the F-35 and «dogfighting» and after new allegations have surfaced concering the effectiveness of the F-35 in this area (or lack of such) it becomes even more relevant. In this post I will therefore try to elaborate a bit more on air-to-air combat and which factors help determine its outcome.

A dogfight is combat in the air between two aircraft where the distance is short enough that the pilots are able to see each other with their own eyes. When training for this kind of combat, we call it «Basic Fighter Maneuvers» (BFM). Before the days of missiles and radars, dogfighting was the only form of air combat, and machine guns (or cannons) were the only weapons. This changed rapidly during the 1960s, but it turned out that early missiles were unreliable. Machine guns and «dogfights» were therefore still relevant in both the Vietnam and Yom Kippur wars.

The F-16 was also immature in many ways when the Norwegian Air Force received them during the 1980s. The radar was «shortsighted», and the only armament were guns and short ranged heat-seeking missiles. During the 1980s, Norwegian pilots trained to meet Soviet aircraft with long-range missiles. The Norwegian pilots could certainly hope that the Soviet missiles would not work, but it would be foolish to rely on such an assumption. As a result, Norwegian F-16s would go defensively into any dogfight, with the aim of surviving the initial long range fire of their opponent, before being able to hopefully retaliate once the battle moved within visual range. To do so, the only thing our F-16s could do was to try to confuse the enemy with deceptive maneuvers; perhaps this would allow at least one of our aircraft to survive all the way to a merge and hence have an opportunity to catch up? The problem was that such diversionary maneuvers tended to confuse both parties. Therefore, the starting point for the ensuing dogfight was poor.

With the F-35 however the situation is quite different. Today’s missiles are far more reliable and the sensors are in a completely different league. I know that the F-35 will perform formidably at long range, but it is not my intention in this post to discuss whether dogfighting is relevant or not for the F-35. There are several reasons why the F-35 could end up in a dogfight. After all, when all the missiles are gone the gun is the only option that we are left with. Or what if we meet an opponent with an even smaller radar signature? Or an opponent that is able to evade all our missiles, in one way or another? My focus in this post is therefore the factors that help determine the outcome of a dogfight.

The performance of the airplane is important. The most relevant factors are how small I can make my turn radius, how quickly I can turn the aircraft around and how quickly the airplane can accelerate and gain speed. But let’s say that I am training BFM in «my» F-16 against a SAAB Safari (basic trainer) from the pilot training school at Bardufoss. Would this be an easy match? As it happens, the Safari is actually better than the F-16 in two relevant areas; it has a smaller turning radius and can fly slower. As a consequence, I will lose if I enter the fight on the Safari’s terms, and try to win by «out-turning» my opponent (just ignore for the moment that the Safari is completely unarmed).

The relevance is that although the F-16 is an agile airplane, I cannot beat neither the SAAB Safari nor any other combat aircraft without having a good plan for doing so. In a dogfight between an F-16 and a SAAB Safari I will have other strenghts; I can find the Safari on my radar and enter the fight unseen, I can sustain five times the speed of the Safari and I can fly higher.

So what would I actually have done in a theoretical dogfight like this one?

I would have done anything I could to sneak in undiscovered; plunge down on the Safari from an almost vertical position, slightly behind. The Safari-pilot wouldn´t have had any realistic chance to see me before the attack was over. If I had missed with the first volley from my cannon, the plan would have been to «escape» vertically upward again, and repeat the attack. This is not something the Safari would be able to match. I would be fighting the Safari on my own terms.

So how does this apply in the case of an engagement between the F-16 and the F-35? It depends, and it particularly depends on how the F-16 is loaded. A stripped-down F-16 is a formidable opponent to anyone in BFM. However, this changes quickly when we dress the F-16 up for combat. If we are to compare the F-16 and F-35 on an equal basis, we must assume that the F-16 will be carrying both external fuel, a «jamming pod» for electronic warfare, weapon mounts for bombs, missiles and a camera pod for target acquisition and illumination. With this loadout, the F-16´s performance is significantly reduced: The maximum angle of attack is reduced by 40% (the ability to move the nose away from the direction of travel), the roll rate is lowered, the maximum allowable airspeed is reduced and the g-limitations are stricter.

So what, you might ask? My point is that a that a well thought-out plan is essential. I need to know the strengths and weaknesses of both my own airplane and that of my opponent. Even with a superior and modern fighter I must utilize my own strengths and not let my opponent dictate the terms of the fight.

Overall I can say that a stripped-down F-16 has slightly better sustained turn rate than the F-35. However, an F-35 has the advantage with regards to getting inside the turn of its opponent. In a dogfight between the F-16 and the F-35 they will therefore both have strengths to play on.

When we train BFM in Norway – F-16 against F-16 – it is often the case that one of the two plays the role of the opponent. When an instructor acts as the opponent to an inexperienced pilot, the instructor commonly refrains from using the afterburner. Compared to the instructor, the student pilot has 60% more engine power available – a «twin engined» F-16! Still, the student pilot does not always win, despite superior power and performance.

Another common scenario is to train from a defensive starting point. At exercise start, the ‘aggressor’ will usually be 3,000 ft behind, in a lazy turn. In this situation, the aggressor has every advantage. With a skilled pilot, the defending aircraft should not be able to survive an attack from such a short distance. Nevertheless, it still happens that the roles are switched, and the hunted becomes the hunter. My main thesis is therefore hardly controversial; the pilot who trains consistently and builds experience – the pilot with a large «bag of tricks» – will win!

How I end up in a dogfight is also a critical factor. Just earlier today I was lucky enough to be able to practice three BFM sets in the F-16. Two defensive sets, and one «high aspect» set. Before we took off, we went through the initial parameters, our roles, safety rules and objectives for the exercise. The world was simple; two fighters in the training area and one mission to complete. I was 100% ready to defend myself in the best way possible when my colleague called «fight’s on» over the radio. When we run larger and more realistic scenarios, however, my experience is that the path leading up to a BFM-engagement tends to be both confusing and chaotic. If we are in control, know what we are doing and interpret the tactical situation correctly, we will not end up in a dogfight. When we do end up in a dogfight anyway, it tends to be both unexpected and inconvenient.

The first hint of an unseen foe could be cannon rounds slamming into the hull. That rarely ends well. Fortunately, the F-35 is tricky to spot and has very good sensors. It’s hard to sneak up on an F-35 without being detected. I think it is unlikely that I will be caught completely off guard in the F-35. I my opinion, the most likely scenarios for an F-35 to end up in a dogfight is that an opponent somehow has evaded its missiles, or that all missiles are spent. Therefore, I believe that the F-35 will be the one to enter the arena with the best situational awareness. Having an overview of the situation will allow me to plan my attack; I can prepare myself mentally for what will happen, I can minimize my signature, maybe try to sneak up on my opponent from a dead angle. I can adjust my speed, height and geometry, I can dump heavy weapons to make the aircraft more maneuverable, and I can prepare my desired weapon and optimize the sensors as I approach the merge. I would therefore argue that the situational awareness of a well-trained pilot is the strongest factor when it comes to winning a dogfight.

Kampflybloggen (The Combat Aircraft Blog) is the official blog of the Norwegian F-35 Program Office within the Norwegian Ministry of Defence. The author of this piece, Captain Morten Hanche, is a F-16-pilot with the Royal Norwegian Air Force, and has been picked to lead Norwegian Operational Testing & Evaluation of the F-35.


http://blogg.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/06/30/dogfight-og-f-35/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2015, 01:09
by popcorn
Thanks for that perspective Lamoey. It's apparent that some people are jumping to all sorts of conclusions with limited information and understanding of the recent F-35 report. It was just one snapshot in time of a platform still in development but this does not sit well with those with a need for instant gratification. Oh well, this too will pass... :shrug:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2015, 18:02
by eskodas
agilefalcon16 wrote:


That link is indeed a good compilation of information, however I never suggested the plane isn't a capable aircraft. It certainly will be. I was just stating that - considering the extreme cost of the program in its entirety - the fact that this multirole fighter can do all that it can do, yet cannot do so while simultaneously (and impressively) out-flying its still quite potent 40 year old multirole predecessor, is still a bit disheartening. (In my opinion)


If you had of read the webpage you would know it's not an "extreme" cost, it's cost is fairly moderate relative to other aircraft, it's simply a matter of the US possessing a lot of aircraft that are old and need replacing. The F-35 *is* capable of out maneuvering the F-16 in certain regimes, but it's not necessary in the slightest thanks to both High Off Bore missiles and the F-35s superior Sensors/Stealth. It's a matter of cost. https://i.imgur.com/qRto6cG.png

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 09 Jul 2015, 22:27
by bumtish
lamoey wrote:Here is the response from the Norwegian F-35 Project Office: English version published today

Dogfighting and the F-35
By Morten Hanche

Overall I can say that a stripped-down F-16 has slightly better sustained turn rate than the F-35. However, an F-35 has the advantage with regards to getting inside the turn of its opponent. In a dogfight between the F-16 and the F-35 they will therefore both have strengths to play on.


Kampflybloggen (The Combat Aircraft Blog) is the official blog of the Norwegian F-35 Program Office within the Norwegian Ministry of Defence. The author of this piece, Captain Morten Hanche, is a F-16-pilot with the Royal Norwegian Air Force, and has been picked to lead Norwegian Operational Testing & Evaluation of the F-35.


http://blogg.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/06/30/dogfight-og-f-35/


I will add this from another blog post. My translation.

...With the F-35 we will get more of this*, compared to what we are used to today. To discover this was a very positive experience for me. With full armaments the F-35 operates without straining itself at altitudes 10000 to 15000 ft higher than our F-16, without using afterburner. The cruise speed is 50 to 80 knots higher, just like that. In the F-16 i have to gain speed before shooting a missile. F-35 cruises faster and higher. This is why I am ready to shoot [the missile] far at any time.


Kampflybloggen (The Combat Aircraft Blog) is the official blog of the Norwegian F-35 Program Office within the Norwegian Ministry of Defence. The author of this piece, Captain Morten Hanche, is a F-16-pilot with the Royal Norwegian Air Force, and has been picked to lead Norwegian Operational Testing & Evaluation of the F-35

http://blogg.regjeringen.no/kampfly/201 ... elt-annet/


* Range, altitude, speed.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 08:08
by spazsinbad
It is really sad that the trembling TRIMBLE has NOT linked to the 'HANCHE' story and why not? So I will guess the trembling trimble 'very late I gather' story refers to complete Hanche report above by 'lamoey' - I can only guess. Anyhoo Tremble:
Norwergian pilot counters leaked F-35 dogfight report [Must be a 'hit piece' for a slow news day eh]
01 Mar 2016 Stephen Trimble

"A Norwegian fighter pilot has published a soft rebuttal to a damaging critique leaked last summer about the Lockheed Martin F-35A’s dogfighting prowess, contradicting many of the critical points made in the scathing review written by a Lockheed test pilot.

Norwegian air force Maj Morten “Dolby” Hanche, a US Navy test pilot school graduate with 2,200 flight hours in F-16s, has flown several mock dogfights at Luke AFB, Arizona, against F-16s since becoming Norway’s first F-35 pilot last November.

In a blog post on Norway’s Ministry of Defence web site, [URL pray tell] Hanche never directly mentions the leaked report entitled, “F-35A High Angle of Attack Operational Maneuvers”, dated 14 January 2015, and exposed last June by blogger David Axe on WarIsBoring.com....

...In one area, Hanche and the Lockheed test pilot share similar concerns about the F-35’s cockpit visibility, but come to different conclusions about the scale of the problem.

Both pilots agreed that the head rest makes it harder to look for targets behind the aircraft. But the Norwegian pilot suggests that the Lockheed pilot over-stated the problem after a single flight experience. By learning to tilt forward in his seat before looking behind, Hanche makes the point that he found a way to mitigate the visibility problem through trial and error after a few flights.

Hanche also makes another point that may seem surprising nearly a decade after the first F-35A prototype completed first flight. Due to several programme delays, the US Air Force is still learning how to use the F-35A in combat. [Aircraft is in SDD dimwit] Initial operational capability for the F-35A is scheduled later this year.

“The final ‘textbook’ for how to best employ the F-35 in visual combat – basic fighter maneouvres – has not been written yet,” Hanche writes. “It is literally being written by my neighbor down here in Arizona!”

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... or-422552/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 08:23
by endre
He had not linked to it yet because I had not sent him the live link before he published...:)

Here you go: http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfl ... ed-so-far/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 09:19
by spazsinbad
OK thanks 'endre'.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 10:37
by hornetfinn
This is great insight to how F-35 flies, thank you! I think a lot of pilots are going to be very surprised when going against F-35 in air-to-air exercises! I think even F-22 pilots will find it very, very difficult opponent.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 10:51
by element1loop
Tweet War is Boring? :P

Nah. Screw 'em.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 12:50
by cosmicdwarf
element1loop wrote:Tweet War is Boring? :P

Nah. Screw 'em.

He'd ignore it anyway.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 13:30
by Dragon029
Sheesh, not only did Trimble not link to the source, but there's a few errors in that article; "Boeing F-15 and F-16", "lacking power after high angle of attack manoeuvres", "up to 40˚ high in mid-air."; must have been written quickly. He also seems to run with the idea proposed by Axe that the pilot was giving a 'scathing' review, when that's the nature of how such reports should read.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 16:13
by vanshilar
Dragon029 wrote:He also seems to run with the idea proposed by Axe that the pilot was giving a 'scathing' review, when that's due to selective quoting and stuffing words into the pilot's mouth by David Axe.


FIFY.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 16:41
by mixelflick
Hard to say if this is really true...

On the one hand it seems to be um, underwhelming. F-16 like performance coupled with F-18 like nose pointing ability is admirable, but again it only matches 4th gen stuff. And it's clear it'll be outperformed by 4+ gen stuff like the Typhoon, SU-35, SU-27SM etc.

Where it might shine is in multiple aircraft furballs. That ability to ID friendly/enemy aircraft is clutch, and will lead to many a first shot/first kill. My concern is its limited air-to air load out. In most cases, it's just 4 AMRAAMS, and the F-35 B/C has no gun. Sure it has a podded gun, but we don't know how stealthy it is/how much drag is added. Or even if it'll be carrying it!

If those missiles miss, the F-35 has a real problem on its hands. It can't run like an F-22. It can't turn like a Flanker and it can't climb like a Typhoon. I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 16:46
by cosmicdwarf
vanshilar wrote:
Dragon029 wrote:He also seems to run with the idea proposed by Axe that the pilot was giving a 'scathing' review, when that's due to selective quoting and stuffing words into the pilot's mouth by David Axe.


FIFY.

It was the way the media reported it, so it makes sense that if your writing something for media consumption you'd do the same.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 16:54
by mixelflick
Apparently, this pilot is damn impressed with the F-35. He came from F-16's...

http://theaviationist.com/2016/03/01/he ... d-account/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 17:11
by krorvik
I think there are a few people around that need to realize they may have spoken too soon, too loud ;)

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 17:22
by castlebravo
endre wrote:He had not linked to it yet because I had not sent him the live link before he published...:)

Here you go: http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfl ... ed-so-far/


That was a great read, but I suffered through the Google translate before figuring out the entire article is repeated in English half way down. :doh:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 17:40
by zero-one
Some of the best lines from Major Morten “Dolby” Hanche, one of the Royal Norwegian Air Force experienced pilots and the first to fly the F-35.


A stripped-down F-16 is a formidable opponent to anyone in BFM. However, this changes quickly when we dress the F-16 up for combat. If we are to compare the F-16 and F-35 on an equal basis, we must assume that the F-16 will be carrying both external fuel, a «jamming pod» for electronic warfare, weapon mounts for bombs, missiles and a camera pod for target acquisition and illumination. With this loadout, the F-16´s performance is significantly reduced: The maximum angle of attack is reduced by 40% (the ability to move the nose away from the direction of travel), the roll rate is lowered, the maximum allowable airspeed is reduced and the g-limitations are stricter.

Overall I can say that a stripped-down F-16 has slightly better sustained turn rate than the F-35. However, an F-35 has the advantage with regards to getting inside the turn of its opponent. In a dogfight between the F-16 and the F-35 they will therefore both have strengths to play on.


Fortunately, the F-35 is tricky to spot and has very good sensors. It’s hard to sneak up on an F-35 without being detected. I think it is unlikely that I will be caught completely off guard in the F-35. I my opinion, the most likely scenarios for an F-35 to end up in a dogfight is that an opponent somehow has evaded its missiles, or that all missiles are spent. Therefore, I believe that the F-35 will be the one to enter the arena with the best situational awareness. Having an overview of the situation will allow me to plan my attack; I can prepare myself mentally for what will happen, I can minimize my signature, maybe try to sneak up on my opponent from a dead angle. I can adjust my speed, height and geometry, I can dump heavy weapons to make the aircraft more maneuverable, and I can prepare my desired weapon and optimize the sensors as I approach the merge.

So how does the F-35 behave in a dogfight? The offensive role feels somewhat different from what I am used to with the F-16. In the F-16, I had to be more patient than in the F-35, before pointing my nose at my opponent to employ weapons; pointing my nose and employing, before being safely established in the control position, would often lead to a role reversal, where the offensive became the defensive part.

The F-35 provides me as a pilot greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire. (The F-35 is capable of significantly higher Angle of Attack (AOA) than the F-16. Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane – where nose is pointing – and where the aircraft is actually heading – the vector). This improved ability to point at my opponent enables me to deliver weapons earlier than I am used to with the F-16, it forces my opponent to react even more defensively, and it gives me the ability to reduce the airspeed quicker than in the F-16.

To sum it up, my experience so far is that the F-35 makes it easier for me to maintain the offensive role, and it provides me more opportunities to effectively employ weapons at my opponent.

In the defensive role the same characteristics are valuable. I can «whip» the airplane around in a reactive maneuver while slowing down. The F-35 can actually slow down quicker than you´d be able to emergency brake your car. This is important because my opponent has to react to me «stopping, or risk ending up in a role-reversal where he flies past me. (Same principle as many would have seen in Top Gun; «hit the brakes, and he’ll fly right by.»

he F-35 reacts quicker to my pedal inputs than the F-16 would at its maximum AOA (the F-16 would actually be out of control at this AOA). This gives me an alternate way of pointing the airplane where I need it to, in order to threaten an opponent. This «pedal turn» yields an impressive turn rate, even at low airspeeds. In a defensive situation, the «pedal turn» provides me the ability to rapidly neutralize a situation, or perhaps even reverse the roles entirely.

The overall experience of flying the F-35 in aerial combat is different from what I’m used to with the F-16. One obvious difference is that the F-35 shakes quite a bit at high g-loadings and at high angles of attack, while the F-16 hardly shakes at all. The professional terminology is «buffeting», which I also described in an earlier blog post (English version available). This buffeting serves as useful feedback, but it can also be a disadvantage. Because the buffeting only begins at moderate angles of attack, it provides me an intuitive feel for how much I am demanding from the aircraft; what is happening to my overall energy state? On the other hand, several pilots have had trouble reading the information which is displayed on the helmet visor, due to the buffeting. Most of the pilots here at Luke fly with the second-generation helmet. I fly with the third-generation helmet, and I have not found this to be a real issue.

It is a peculiar feeling to be flying the F-35 at high AOA. I can pull the nose up to where my feet «sit» on the horizon and still maintain level altitude. I’m also impressed by how quickly the F-35 accelerates when I reduce the AOA



Cant help but notice, but ACM tactics in an F-35 seem to be to fight like an F/A-18. High AOA and slow speeds. However the F-35 can recover energy rather quickly to repeat the point and shoot cycle over and over again.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 17:48
by castlebravo
Tactics like a Hornet, but with the ability to pull 9g, point the nose at low-speed like a Raptor, and gain smash like a Viper.

His point about the F-35 pilot being able to fight much more aggressively than the F-16 pilot who has to worry about overshooting is particularly interesting. Not being able to sustain turns as well as your opponent in an energy fight doesn't matter very much when you can force him into the fight you want.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 17:56
by bigjku
castlebravo wrote:Tactics like a Hornet, but with the ability to pull 9g, point the nose at low-speed like a Raptor, and gain smash like a Viper.

His point about the F-35 pilot being able to fight much more aggressively than the F-16 pilot who has to worry about overshooting is particularly interesting.


I would also keep in mind that this doesn't take into account utilizing superior 360 engagement capability to dictate the terms of the fight or to respond when placed at a disadvantage. Particularly as newer weapons filter out over time and likely deepen the magazine the F-35 will be able to do things other fighters can't in that regard. Including the PAK-FA which doesn't have the avionics for it yet. If during a merge I can simply shoot at you if you are obtaining an advantage and force you to respond, even with a low to moderate PK on said defensive shot, I can likely then return to a neutral state or a state with the advantage.

We haven't even started incorporating those kinds of tactics yet.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 18:00
by SpudmanWP
The pilot has updated his post:

The F-35 provides me as a pilot greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire. (The F-35 is capable of significantly higher Angle of Attack (AOA) than the F-16. Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane – where nose is pointing – and where the aircraft is actually heading – the vector). This improved ability to point at my opponent enables me to deliver weapons earlier than I am used to with the F-16, it forces my opponent to react even more defensively, and it gives me the ability to reduce the airspeed quicker than in the F-16.

Update: Since I first wrote this post, I have flown additional sorties where I tried an even more aggressive approach to the control position – more aggressive than I thought possible. It worked just fine. The F-35 sticks on like glue, and it is very difficult for the defender to escape.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 18:22
by sferrin
SpudmanWP wrote:The pilot has updated his post:

The F-35 provides me as a pilot greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire. (The F-35 is capable of significantly higher Angle of Attack (AOA) than the F-16. Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane – where nose is pointing – and where the aircraft is actually heading – the vector). This improved ability to point at my opponent enables me to deliver weapons earlier than I am used to with the F-16, it forces my opponent to react even more defensively, and it gives me the ability to reduce the airspeed quicker than in the F-16.

Update: Since I first wrote this post, I have flown additional sorties where I tried an even more aggressive approach to the control position – more aggressive than I thought possible. It worked just fine. The F-35 sticks on like glue, and it is very difficult for the defender to escape.


Send the link to Solomon. :twisted:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 18:33
by XanderCrews
sferrin wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:The pilot has updated his post:

The F-35 provides me as a pilot greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire. (The F-35 is capable of significantly higher Angle of Attack (AOA) than the F-16. Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane – where nose is pointing – and where the aircraft is actually heading – the vector). This improved ability to point at my opponent enables me to deliver weapons earlier than I am used to with the F-16, it forces my opponent to react even more defensively, and it gives me the ability to reduce the airspeed quicker than in the F-16.

Update: Since I first wrote this post, I have flown additional sorties where I tried an even more aggressive approach to the control position – more aggressive than I thought possible. It worked just fine. The F-35 sticks on like glue, and it is very difficult for the defender to escape.


Send the link to Solomon. :twisted:


Image

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 19:31
by spazsinbad
Norwegian test pilot affirms F-35's ability to dogfight
29 Feb 2016 Gareth Jennings

"A Norwegian test pilot has waded into the row surrounding the supposed inability of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) to engage in air-to-air combat, by saying that his experience of the jet shows it to be a very capable dogfighter.

Writing in the official Kampflybloggen blog of the Norwegian F-35 programme, Major Morten 'Dolby' Hanche said on 1 March that the row that erupted in June 2015 following the leaking of a US Air Force (USAF) report that indicated the fifth-generation JSF was defeated in simulated air combat against a fourth-generation Lockheed Martin F-16D Fighting Falcon was not supported by the facts.

Maj Hanche has logged more than 2,200 hours in the F-16 with the Royal Norwegian Air Force (RoNAF) as well as graduating from the US Navy Test Pilot School and becoming the first Norwegian to fly the F-35 in November 2015, and so is as well placed as anyone to compare the relative capabilities of the two types.

"So how does the F-35 behave in a dogfight? The offensive role feels somewhat different from what I am used to with the F-16. In the F-16, I had to be more patient than in the F-35," he said in the blog, adding, "I now have several sorties behind me in the F-35 where the mission has been to train within visual range combat one-on-one, or 'Basic Fighter Manoeuvres [BFM]'. As an F-35-user I still have a lot to learn, but I am left with several impressions. For now my conclusion is that this is an airplane that allows me to be more forward and aggressive than I could ever be in an F-16."

In particular, Maj Hanche noted that the F-35's superior 'high-alpha' capabilities provided him as the pilot with "greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire"; an attribute which is especially useful for the close-in guns engagement of the sort that the aircraft was heavily criticised for in the initial leaked USAF report...."

Source: http://www.janes.com/article/58426/norw ... o-dogfight

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 19:47
by zero-one
I kinda feel sorry for the F-35's aerodynamic engineers right now, they put a lot of effort into making this plane as good as it is in Kinematic performance and they've done a very good job at it. But for years they've had to contend with everyone in the internet criticizing their work and the lackluster defense of the Airforce brass at their side.
Hope this article serves them justice.
:salute:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 20:29
by arrow-nautics
Do we know what block software the Norwegian jet is using? Oh and by the way, someone said, send the link to Soloman but why not Axe too? Then that lying sack of "expletive" can cut out the majority of the article, insert the minority of the CLAW test fail from last year (& yes omit the TRUTH) & set out to tell everyone here we are all idiots!

:devil:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 20:52
by SpudmanWP
If it's a Gen3 helmet then it's likely a Block 3i jet.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 21:29
by playloud
SpudmanWP wrote:If it's a Gen3 helmet then it's likely a Block 3i jet.

This would make it a 7g jet, and it would still have the fuel problem that greatly reduces max g at higher fuel loads.So, there is still room for improvement (with a fixed block 3F).

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 21:56
by endre
*EDIT* Turns out I should stick to what I know and let the pilots talk about software - there are apparently several different designations for the software involved. Point is - the Norwegian jets are flying a beta of 3i, but the Norwegian pilots fly different jets in each of the squadrons at Luke.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 22:01
by lamoey
endre wrote:The Norwegian jets are flying 3iR5, and should be getting R6 quite soon. The jets at Luke are gathered into a common pool, however, so the Norwegian pilots have been flying both US, Norwegian and Australian jets during their training.


Hei Endre. Good to see you here on F-16.net Are there any official lists that indicates what the various R updates brings to the "fight"

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 22:08
by endre
lamoey wrote:
endre wrote:The Norwegian jets are flying 3iR5, and should be getting R6 quite soon. The jets at Luke are gathered into a common pool, however, so the Norwegian pilots have been flying both US, Norwegian and Australian jets during their training.


Hei Endre. Good to see you here on F-16.net Are there any official lists that indicates what the various R updates brings to the "fight"


Thanks! They don't really bring anything new - they are mainly new "beta" versions of the main release, in this case 3i - I guess you could say that they bring more stability! :)

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 22:53
by charlielima223
So is the F-35 the pilot is flying and commenting about have the updated software for the refined flight control laws?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2016, 23:07
by armedupdate
mixelflick wrote:Hard to say if this is really true...

On the one hand it seems to be um, underwhelming. F-16 like performance coupled with F-18 like nose pointing ability is admirable, but again it only matches 4th gen stuff. And it's clear it'll be outperformed by 4+ gen stuff like the Typhoon, SU-35, SU-27SM etc.

I believe F-16s were able to take on Typhoons at lower altitudes before. It is all about skill.

mixelflick wrote:Where it might shine is in multiple aircraft furballs. That ability to ID friendly/enemy aircraft is clutch, and will lead to many a first shot/first kill. My concern is its limited air-to air load out. In most cases, it's just 4 AMRAAMS, and the F-35 B/C has no gun. Sure it has a podded gun, but we don't know how stealthy it is/how much drag is added. Or even if it'll be carrying it!

Well Block 4+ will allow it to carry 6 AMRAAM and now they are making SACM missile. Plus the enemy will rarely outnumber the US forces.
mixelflick wrote:
If those missiles miss, the F-35 has a real problem on its hands. It can't run like an F-22. It can't turn like a Flanker and it can't climb like a Typhoon. I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...

Use, DAS and Sidewinder.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 00:22
by geforcerfx
mixelflick wrote:Hard to say if this is really true...

On the one hand it seems to be um, underwhelming. F-16 like performance coupled with F-18 like nose pointing ability is admirable, but again it only matches 4th gen stuff. And it's clear it'll be outperformed by 4+ gen stuff like the Typhoon, SU-35, SU-27SM etc.


This was the design goal from the get go, take the best qualities of the f-16 and f-18 and put them intoone design, seems like they did it. The f-22 had the same approach, but added a increase in there performance ontop of the capabilites

Where it might shine is in multiple aircraft furballs. That ability to ID friendly/enemy aircraft is clutch, and will lead to many a first shot/first kill.
agreed

My concern is its limited air-to air load out. In most cases, it's just 4 AMRAAMS, and the F-35 B/C has no gun. Sure it has a podded gun, but we don't know how stealthy it is/how much drag is added. Or even if it'll be carrying it!


Hence the 6 amraam development in block 5/6, and the new missiles in development for both the f-22 and f-35

It can't run like an F-22.

What can? Combat loaded 4th gens arn't speed demons

It can't turn like a Flanker

The flanker family are known for there high aoa and instantaneous turn, which was what the blog post was highlighting for the f-35 so......

and it can't climb like a Typhoon.

Educated guess? was under the impression the climb rate was still classified? At any rate we have pilots saying it climbs better than a f-16, so theres a start.

I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...


This is the whole point of 5th gen, there isn't a 4th gen fighter flying that can see a f-22 or f-35 further than 100km (i am being generous)with any sensor onboard. The stealths see you starting at 200km and can react appropriately. The whole out running out turning doesn't mean much when you don't know what the heck is shooting at you. You can't fight what you can't see, fighting a enemy that is denying you SA while enjoying out of this world SA on there side will be a losing battle no matter what slight performance advantage you have.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 00:45
by cantaz
No one noticed the priceless exchange with Briganti?

https://twitter.com/Kampfly_no/statuses ... 4154934272

Interesting that this pilot first flew in an #F35 3 months ago & writes after "several sorties" flying dogfights


No doubt, but "Dolby" bases his opinion on 3 months & "several sorties" which may not be enough to judge


Wow. Just, wow. Where was this super high bar on first-hand F-35 BFM experience when Axe was butchering that test report?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 00:51
by spazsinbad
Norwegian F-35 Pilot Counters Controversial ‘Dogfighting’ Report
01 Mar 2016 Lara Seligman

Similar to other reports about Hanche AND... there is a link to original Hanche article.

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /81170580/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 01:33
by sferrin
mixelflick wrote:Hard to say if this is really true...

On the one hand it seems to be um, underwhelming. F-16 like performance coupled with F-18 like nose pointing ability is admirable, but again it only matches 4th gen stuff. And it's clear it'll be outperformed by 4+ gen stuff like the Typhoon, SU-35, SU-27SM etc.

Where it might shine is in multiple aircraft furballs. That ability to ID friendly/enemy aircraft is clutch, and will lead to many a first shot/first kill. My concern is its limited air-to air load out. In most cases, it's just 4 AMRAAMS, and the F-35 B/C has no gun. Sure it has a podded gun, but we don't know how stealthy it is/how much drag is added. Or even if it'll be carrying it!

If those missiles miss, the F-35 has a real problem on its hands. It can't run like an F-22. It can't turn like a Flanker and it can't climb like a Typhoon. I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...


Wow. Are you really gonna cry that the F-16/Hornet/Harrier replacement isn't an F-22 wrapped inside a Su-35 and painted like a Typhoon? Well sh*t, a Flanker can't see, stealth, network, EW, etc. etc. etc. like an F-35 so I guess the Flanker is just a flying cow turd. I mean damn, a Coors Light can could do better. :doh:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 01:44
by sferrin
Tomorrow's headline from the Basement Dwellers:

"F-35 is inferior to F-16 with buffeting so bad the pilots can't see. Has crappy engine that is so close to exploding it howls."

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 01:57
by count_to_10
There is a recurring theme with the F-35: it flies like a flight combat video game. It will be the only fighter out there with the kind of 360 situational awareness that makes those games playable at all (ever tried to play one with your "radar" damaged? Totally hopeless), and will probably be the only one with the kind of smooth and responsive handling players take for granted.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 04:17
by XanderCrews
mixelflick wrote:Hard to say if this is really true...

On the one hand it seems to be um, underwhelming. F-16 like performance coupled with F-18 like nose pointing ability is admirable, but again it only matches 4th gen stuff. And it's clear it'll be outperformed by 4+ gen stuff like the Typhoon, SU-35, SU-27SM etc.


Those were the original requirements. F-16 and F-18 performance.


If those missiles miss, the F-35 has a real problem on its hands. It can't run like an F-22. It can't turn like a Flanker and it can't climb like a Typhoon. I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...


Oh lord. Since when can an F-16 not "turn like a flanker?"please. F-16 is widely considered a superb dogfighter. But F-35 performing like or better than F-16 "can't dogfight?" There is no logic here. F-16s are nothing to take lightly close in, but the F-35 suddenly is even withe like of better performance

You know what else can't run like an F-22? everything else.

Tell me how a Rafale and hornets of both types can "run" being sub mach 2. where is all the concern for fighters that also don't meet the same examples? How screwed are super hornets? or Vipers and Rafale?

Ridiculous. absolutely ridiculous.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 04:21
by spazsinbad
Test pilot reveals F-35 stealth jet can perform impossible Top Gun ‘fly right by’ manoeuvre as it 'slows down quicker than you can emergency brake your car' [Mostly the HANCHE blog post is regurgitated]
02 Mar 2016 Darren Boyle

"- Major Morten 'Dolby' Hanche has been training with the US Air Force
- The Norwegian fighter pilot has praised his new $100 million stealth jet
- He claims the high-tech weapons system is able to 'stick like glue'
- After four months he said it is a far better aircraft than the older F-16...
...But the program has faced numerous setbacks, including a mysterious :doh: engine fire in 2014 that led commanders to ground planes until the problem could be resolved...."

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... e-car.html

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 04:53
by spazsinbad
Norwegian pilot defends F-35’s dogfighting capability
01 Mar 2016 AIRheads/EH

"...Eye-opener
Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) pilot Ian ‘Gladys’ Knight earlier this year already described to Airheadsfly.com [ http://airheadsfly.com/2016/01/26/dutch ... g-testers/ ] that slow speeds are where the F-35 performs better than the F-16. “Slow-speed and high AOA performance is much better than many fourth generation fighters like the F-16. High angle of attack testing has been an eye-opener for previous F-16 pilots, who are not used to very good slow speed performance. ”

Acceleration
Acceleration from the Pratt & Whitney’s F-135 engine impressed both Hanche and Knight. “It is evident that the F-35 has a powerful engine”, writes the Norwegian...."

Source: http://airheadsfly.com/2016/03/01/norwe ... apability/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 05:08
by spazsinbad
F-35 pilot: ‘Not all about numbers’ [LINKED IN POST IMMEDIATELY ABOVE]
09 Feb 2016 AIRheads/EH

"It’s when you climb into the cockpit and begin your startup. That’s where it begins. That’s where those often talked about 8 million lines of binary code show what they’re all about. That’s when the integrated systems come online on the large, glass touch-screen. That’s when the cleverness presents itself. No more navigating across the cockpit, reaching for the radios or engine instruments, it’s all right there in front you. The jet comes alive. Yes, Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) pilot Ian ‘Gladys’ Knight [& the PIPS] is impressed by the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II. Is everything perfect? No. But they’re working on it....

...However, not everything about the F-35 can be put into numbers and a first impression is one such thing. “I have about 100 hours on the F-35 now after flying 1,700 on the F-16 before”, says Knight. “On my first flight in the Lightning, I immediately noticed how smooth and easy the aircraft handles. It really is very solid and robust compared to the F-16. The first landing was already better than most of my landings in the Viper. I was genuinly impressed.”

Job
His job nonetheless, is to see if he can find anything wrong with it. “At Edwards, we find out how the aircraft behaves in an operational environment. We are all experienced weapon school graduates, but we are not test pilots. We develop, test and validate tactics that make the best use of the aircraft’s capabilities. There’s no reason for us not to be critical towards the aircraft. It is after all the aircraft Dutch pilots will go to war in for the considerable future.”

Air combat
According to Knight – who flew against a herd of modern fighter jets – not much seems wrong when it comes to air combat manoeuvring (ACM) in the F-35. “The F-35 performs similarly to the F-16 and F-18 and has it’s own strengths and weakneses. We try to take advantage of those strengths while avoiding that part of the envelope where other aircraft can beat us. That is what operational testing is all about: you take the aircraft with all it’s inherent strengths and weaknesses and come up with the best way to execute the mission.”

World of awareness
The F-35 can stand its own against F-16s, F-18s and probably the like. But were the stealthy Lightning II really shines, is being the eye in the sky that shares information with other aircraft, striking targets itself when needed and defeating or misleading threats before they get anywhere near. “This aircraft provides another world of situational awareness. Compared to that, the F-16’s capabilities are rudimentary and obsolete”, states Knight

Last year, the Dutch F-35s flew complex missions with their F-16 predecessors. The main focus was fourth and fifth generation fighter integration and interoperability. “It was a great experience and good to see the added value of the F-35. One F-16 pilot even described our F-35 capability as flipping on a light switch: without F-35s in the fight they were struggling in the dark, with F-35s by their side they had very high situational awareness.”...

...Feedback
What is there constantly in the F-35, is buffeting. It could be regarded as unwanted but it has its advantages, says Knight. “The vibrations are noticable for the pilot, but they are also a way of getting feedback. It’s like the jet is talking to you, a sort of flying by the seat of the pants. We are curious to know the effect of the vibrations on gun accuracy, though....

Source: http://airheadsfly.com/2016/02/09/f-35- ... t-numbers/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 09:19
by krorvik
Norwegian paper Dagbladet has a story (norwegian language) today:

http://www.dagbladet.no/2016/03/02/nyhe ... /43354957/

There is still a lot of focus on the issues, and, as usual, War is Boring is brought up. The last post by Hanche is not mentioned, so I sent them an email and pointed them in that direction, and also mentioned the incorrect interpretations of test report made by War is boring.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 10:09
by hornetfinn
mixelflick wrote:Hard to say if this is really true...

On the one hand it seems to be um, underwhelming. F-16 like performance coupled with F-18 like nose pointing ability is admirable, but again it only matches 4th gen stuff. And it's clear it'll be outperformed by 4+ gen stuff like the Typhoon, SU-35, SU-27SM etc.


I think you have some false impressions about each of these aircraft and their performances. Typhoon can only about match F-16 in high AOA maneuvers. Su-35 actually has inferior acceleration at low level to F-16 according to F-16 flight manual and KNAAPO website. Of course Su-35 has better nose pointing ability and high-AoA capability. According to Italian pilots F-16 can match Typhoon below 10,000ft but above that Typhoon is difficult to beat.

So to sum it up.
1. F-35 has better acceleration than F-16 (according to pilots) and thus should be at least equal to Su-35, Su-27SM and possibly close toTyphoon. In combat loadings (even A-A) it should be comparatively even better due to internal carriage.

2. F-35 has much better nose pointing ability to F-16 and about equal to Super Hornet. Thus it should be much better than Typhoon in that department and very close to Su-35 and Su-27SM. From what I've seen, Su-35 is better mainly at extremely slow speed backflips and stuff and does not seem superior at higher speed compared to Super Hornet (or even Classic Hornet) for example.

3. According to Beesley, F-22 has only about equal or slightly better acceleration than F-16 and much better AoA capabilities (maybe even better than SH). This sounds awefully lot like F-35.

4. It's said that clean F-16 has somewhat better high speed sustained turn capabilities to F-35, but keep in mind that the comments are for jets with a lot of restrictions and FOC F-35 will have those removed. AFAIK, clean F-16 is still very good at high speed sustained turns and close to Typhoon.

So I don't see anything that suggest F-35 being seriously outperformed by pretty much anything out there in dogfight/BFM performance. It may not be the best in every aspect against every fighter out there but it seems like F-22 is the only one which currently has equal or better performance to F-35 in every aspect. However the differences are not that big as to make it overwhelming superiority over F-35. Of course the supersonic high-altitude performance of F-22 is clearly much better. Of course F-35 is multi-role fighter with much better all-around capabilties. PAK-FA might be about equal or even slightly better in flight performances than F-22 once it gets fully developed. J-20 and J-31, probably not even close.

mixelflick wrote:If those missiles miss, the F-35 has a real problem on its hands. It can't run like an F-22. It can't turn like a Flanker and it can't climb like a Typhoon. I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...


I would. Another thing that would save the day for F-35 is the superior SA, especially networked with other F-35s. Su-35 pilots would not know if there are other F-35s in the air, where they are, how many are there and what weapons they have. They could easily be lured to deadly trap and I'm sure they'd try to avoid that at all costs. Su-35 pilots would not be able to be sure when a single F-35 has launched all its missiles and they'd definitely not know when all the F-35s in the air had launched all their missiles.

Besides, Flanker carrying weapons is not that much faster than F-35 and would have serious trouble trying to close the distance after evading missiles from F-35. It would be likely be at relatively low energy state and not at optimum altitude either while F-35 might be thundering home already. F-35 would not need that much head start to make it impossible for Flanker to catch before running out of gas or space.

IMO, F-35 will be able to engage and disengage pretty much at will against all 4th gen fighters. I think only F-22 might be able to do something about it as it has the acceleration, speed and sensors to potentially do it.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 10:24
by nathan77
mixelflick wrote:If those missiles miss, the F-35 has a real problem on its hands. It can't run like an F-22. It can't turn like a Flanker and it can't climb like a Typhoon. I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...



Here's how I see it; imagine 4 F-35's go up against 4 SU-35's.
The F-35's with the stealth and sensor advantage has the 'first look, first shot' advantage, and fires the first volley of missiles against the SU-35's. The SU-35's detect the incoming AMRAAMs; and know that they have been targeted by stealth aircraft (probably F-35's). The SU-35's pilots, believing their aircraft has the kinetic advantage, choose to attempt to close the distance and force the merge. However, that would mean that they have to foolishly fly head-first towards the incoming AMRAAMs. So even if one SU-35 is very lucky, and the missile misses, what about his wingmen? Chances are his wingmen wouldn't be so lucky. So now when the merge occurs, he'll be at a 1 vs 4, or 2 vs 4 disadvantage against the F-35's. And I don't care how much better the SU-35's performance is meant to be; it's not THAT good. Outnumbered, they'd be easy pickings.

And even if the SU-35's chooses not to engage and run from the AMRAAMs, and are successful in all surviving - by the time the missiles have run out of legs, the F-35's would be long gone.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 10:28
by krorvik
hornetfinn wrote: In combat loadings (even A-A) it should be comparatively even better due to internal carriage.


One of the things people tend to forget is that carrying internally not only reduces drag, but places weapons and fuel closer to axis of rotation for yaw and roll especially. This is likely to have a significant effect round those axes.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 12:14
by krorvik
krorvik wrote:Norwegian paper Dagbladet has a story (norwegian language) today:

http://www.dagbladet.no/2016/03/02/nyhe ... /43354957/


Dagbladet updated the post after my notification, thumbs up.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 12:33
by popcorn
In the instances where the F-22 has operated in proximity of Russian/Syrian aircraft, the latter appear to have been oblivious to it's presence. Shades of the Raptor toying with that hapless Iranian Phantom. Gojng up against US 5Gens should severely test the nerves of opposing pilots, like swimming in waters with multiple Great White Shark sightings. :devil:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 13:46
by element1loop
krorvik wrote:
hornetfinn wrote: In combat loadings (even A-A) it should be comparatively even better due to internal carriage.


One of the things people tend to forget is that carrying internally not only reduces drag, but places weapons and fuel closer to axis of rotation for yaw and roll especially. This is likely to have a significant effect round those axes.


Correct. In motorbike design it's known as mass-centralization, and of course mass balance, that aviation is fully familiar with. Mass centralization is key to a whole range of performance and agility optimizations and the final outright speed and race-ability of a modern race bike design. The more centralized the mass and the more optimal its balance with the centralization, for all maneuvers, the faster and better traction the bike has, and the more controllable, smooth, precise and predictable in its responses it becomes, as performance and power level rise, and stresses traction and direction changing limits (agility).

For an aircraft it will be much the same and will be another key factor to consider in future fifth-gen opposing designs. Is there a more mass-centralized combat-loaded aircraft than F-35, at this performance level? Only the F-22.

Excellent summary above hornetfinn.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 14:29
by spazsinbad
FighterSweep gets busy with it.... references AVIATIONIST which in turn is the HANCHE story.
Ask a Fighter Pilot: Dogfighting in the F-35!
02 Mar 2016 C.W. Lemoine

"...let’s address your actual question: what does this article tell us?

Well, as GM [ https://fightersweep.com/4210/dogfighti ... 18-hornet/ ] pointed out, a dogfight boils down to RATE vs RADIUS. You can think of the two as ENERGY vs NOSE POSITION. The rate fighter uses his energy advantage to turn more quickly (measured in degrees per second) while the radius fighter uses his nose position advantage to make a smaller circle (measured in feet).

There are a lot of “cheats” that designers will use to make a fighter good at both. These include Leading Edge Flaps that extend based on airspeed, Leading Edge Extensions that help with low speed control, and thrust vectoring. This is why fighters like the Viper, Hornet, and Raptor do so well in both types of fights.

Angle of Attack (AoA, or Alpha) is mostly referred to in the slow speed, radius-fight environment. A fighter that can fly with high angles of attack (that angle between the relative wind and the chord line of the wing) can “point their nose” more easily. It’s what makes a Hornet so scary to fight. They’re still flying and in control while other aircraft stall and fall out of the sky.

What the Viper and F-35 have that the Hornet doesn’t is power. Yes, the Viper is AoA limited, but that also means it’s never “not flying,” and has the ability to power its way out of just about any situation. This is what’s meant by transitioning from maneuver to maneuver.

The Hornet might be able to cash in, pointing the nose at 50 knots and 60 Alpha, but that’s it. You’re along for the ride at that point. When it gets slow, it’s very hard to get that energy back.

A Viper, on the other hand, can regain that energy through thrust. Coming off the limiter slightly, especially at low altitude where the big inlet and GE motor do their best work, can mean getting back to a fighting airspeed and energy state. This is especially useful if there are multiple bandits – you don’t want to finish a fight and be a sitting duck.

If the reports are accurate, that means that the F-35 is a good compromise between the two. It has the ability to point its nose where the Viper couldn’t, while not getting itself into an unrecoverable energy state like the Hornet. That’s good news.

At the end of the day, though, I still say don’t chase the reports–and continue to ask informed questions. As the F-35 gains more ground in its testing, there will be more reports coming out – some good and some bad. We won’t really know what it’s truly capable of until we see it in the hands of Johnny Wingman who just finished his initial Mission Qualification Training. That’s where the realistic operational capabilities will be found as he employs the aircraft exactly as he’s been trained, having never been in any other jet."

Source: https://fightersweep.com/4395/ask-a-fig ... -the-f-35/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 17:32
by SpudmanWP
nathan77 wrote:The SU-35's pilots, believing their aircraft has the kinetic advantage, choose to attempt to close the distance and force the merge.
The problem with that train-of-thought is that assumes that the F-35's will play along and fly straight towards the incoming SUs. The main advantage to Situational Awareness is that you get to dictate the engagement scenario.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 17:33
by cosmicdwarf
SpudmanWP wrote:
nathan77 wrote:The SU-35's pilots, believing their aircraft has the kinetic advantage, choose to attempt to close the distance and force the merge.
The problem with that train-of-thought is that assumes that the F-35's will play along and fly straight towards the incoming SUs. The main advantage to Situational Awareness is that you get to dictate the engagement scenario.

It' also the advantage of not being seen first that stealth gives.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 18:43
by wrightwing
nathan77 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:If those missiles miss, the F-35 has a real problem on its hands. It can't run like an F-22. It can't turn like a Flanker and it can't climb like a Typhoon. I suppose it could hide, but the enemy would have many chances at acquiring it. And against an opponent like the SU-35, I wouldn't bet my life on stealth saving me...



Here's how I see it; imagine 4 F-35's go up against 4 SU-35's.
The F-35's with the stealth and sensor advantage has the 'first look, first shot' advantage, and fires the first volley of missiles against the SU-35's. The SU-35's detect the incoming AMRAAMs; and know that they have been targeted by stealth aircraft (probably F-35's). The SU-35's pilots, believing their aircraft has the kinetic advantage, choose to attempt to close the distance and force the merge. However, that would mean that they have to foolishly fly head-first towards the incoming AMRAAMs. So even if one SU-35 is very lucky, and the missile misses, what about his wingmen? Chances are his wingmen wouldn't be so lucky. So now when the merge occurs, he'll be at a 1 vs 4, or 2 vs 4 disadvantage against the F-35's. And I don't care how much better the SU-35's performance is meant to be; it's not THAT good. Outnumbered, they'd be easy pickings.

And even if the SU-35's chooses not to engage and run from the AMRAAMs, and are successful in all surviving - by the time the missiles have run out of legs, the F-35's would be long gone.


It's not even a given that the Flankers would know which direction would result in a merge. By the time they detected the incoming missiles, the F-35s would be in a different location.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 18:44
by krorvik
And might not be in the same group at firing time.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 19:12
by zero-one
Well heres what the Norwegian pilot said about that issue, but as we can see in his report, the F-35 will be quite comfortable shooting down a Flanker with guns

http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfl ... t-og-f-35/
There are several reasons why the F-35 could end up in a dogfight. After all, when all the missiles are gone the gun is the only option that we are left with. Or what if we meet an opponent with an even smaller radar signature? Or an opponent that is able to evade all our missiles, in one way or another?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2016, 20:58
by geforcerfx
nathan77 wrote:
Here's how I see it; imagine 4 F-35's go up against 4 SU-35's.
The F-35's with the stealth and sensor advantage has the 'first look, first shot' advantage, and fires the first volley of missiles against the SU-35's. The SU-35's detect the incoming AMRAAMs; and know that they have been targeted by stealth aircraft (probably F-35's). The SU-35's pilots, believing their aircraft has the kinetic advantage, choose to attempt to close the distance and force the merge. However, that would mean that they have to foolishly fly head-first towards the incoming AMRAAMs. So even if one SU-35 is very lucky, and the missile misses, what about his wingmen? Chances are his wingmen wouldn't be so lucky. So now when the merge occurs, he'll be at a 1 vs 4, or 2 vs 4 disadvantage against the F-35's. And I don't care how much better the SU-35's performance is meant to be; it's not THAT good. Outnumbered, they'd be easy pickings.

And even if the SU-35's chooses not to engage and run from the AMRAAMs, and are successful in all surviving - by the time the missiles have run out of legs, the F-35's would be long gone.


Close the distance on what? They detect the amramm, if they didn't detect the launch they have no idea where the f-35s are, they have a rough directional idea. If the f-35s are split up by 30-40 miles and you go chasing one set in one direction you just opened your self up to side shots from the remainders and have taken your radar out of the equation on those two aircraft, who now have a lovely radar picture of the side/rear of your aircraft. The only smart thing to do if you got ghosts firing on you is gtfo, try and regroup and hope what ever it was ain't chasing you.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 00:44
by count_to_10
It gets worse if the AMRAAMs can pull the torpedo trick of changing direction to approach the target from a completely different baring than the launching platform. Though you may accomplish the same thing by sending one F-35 out to fire all of it's missiles from one direction and run, while the rest of the pack waits in ambush.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 00:57
by geforcerfx
count_to_10 wrote:It gets worse if the AMRAAMs can pull the torpedo trick of changing direction to approach the target from a completely different baring than the launching platform. Though you may accomplish the same thing by sending one F-35 out to fire all of it's missiles from one direction and run, while the rest of the pack waits in ambush.


The mind games that stealth brings to bvr is truly limitless, I can't imagine the frustration / fear of having to fight something that you can see with your eye or any of your sensors.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 01:25
by optimist
I would assume the F-35 at the back would have his radar working, feeding to the other 3 or more. If there were off board sensors, that would also add to the picture.
we all need to broaden our systems within systems view and not get stuck in just one. The f-35 firing its own or another f-35's missile, might not be first choice. The USMC say ARGUS and sm's are there to be used and ships carry a few more missiles than a plane. they are also talking about having missile UAV mules.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 01:31
by KamenRiderBlade
optimist wrote:I would assume the F-35 at the back would have his radar working, feeding to the other 3 or more. If there were off board sensors, that would also add to the picture.
we all need to broaden our systems within systems view and not get stuck in just one. The f-35 firing its own or another f-35's missile, might not be first choice. The USMC say ARGUS and sm's are there to be used and ships carry a few more missiles than a plane. they are also talking about having missile UAV mules.

I envision a X-47B scaled up to be around E-2 Hawkeye size in dimensions (with wings folded) with a single F135 engine, basic sensors and a whole lot of carrying capacity.

20,000 lb empty, 70,000 lb max take off weight

Two models, one is a dedicated Refueling model, the other a ammo truck in the sky

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 02:03
by derphurf
The F35 in WVR combat really sounds just like a Hornet. Especially in a multiple bandit or 2 v 2, 3 v 3 engagement, it seems like the F-16 should be able to hold its own or more if it sticks to energy fighting basics. Any Hornet that can't keep up with its nose pointing is going to get nailed by gun or AIM-9X.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 02:29
by armedupdate
derphurf wrote:The F35 in WVR combat really sounds just like a Hornet. Especially in a multiple bandit or 2 v 2, 3 v 3 engagement, it seems like the F-16 should be able to hold its own or more if it sticks to energy fighting basics. Any Hornet that can't keep up with its nose pointing is going to get nailed by gun or AIM-9X.

The problem is the F-35 has similar acceleration to the F-16. The reason why the F-16 can do nasty speed tricks against the Hornet because it retains energy much better. However against the F-35, the F-35 is similar but the F-35 has better AoA and deceleration. So the F-35 is more capable than the F-16 in that reguard.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 02:50
by derphurf
armedupdate wrote:
derphurf wrote:The F35 in WVR combat really sounds just like a Hornet. Especially in a multiple bandit or 2 v 2, 3 v 3 engagement, it seems like the F-16 should be able to hold its own or more if it sticks to energy fighting basics. Any Hornet that can't keep up with its nose pointing is going to get nailed by gun or AIM-9X.

The problem is the F-35 has similar acceleration to the F-16. The reason why the F-16 can do nasty speed tricks against the Hornet because it retains energy much better. However against the F-35, the F-35 is similar but the F-35 has better AoA and deceleration. So the F-35 is more capable than the F-16 in that reguard.


Based on talks by F35 drivers, the F-16 still holds the advantage in retaining energy, however. Any high AOA manuever you do automatically puts you in a lower energy state

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 02:52
by mk82
spazsinbad wrote:
F-35 pilot: ‘Not all about numbers’ [LINKED IN POST IMMEDIATELY ABOVE]
09 Feb 2016 AIRheads/EH

"It’s when you climb into the cockpit and begin your startup. That’s where it begins. That’s where those often talked about 8 million lines of binary code show what they’re all about. That’s when the integrated systems come online on the large, glass touch-screen. That’s when the cleverness presents itself. No more navigating across the cockpit, reaching for the radios or engine instruments, it’s all right there in front you. The jet comes alive. Yes, Royal Netherlands Air Force (RNLAF) pilot Ian ‘Gladys’ Knight [& the PIPS] is impressed by the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II. Is everything perfect? No. But they’re working on it....

...However, not everything about the F-35 can be put into numbers and a first impression is one such thing. “I have about 100 hours on the F-35 now after flying 1,700 on the F-16 before”, says Knight. “On my first flight in the Lightning, I immediately noticed how smooth and easy the aircraft handles. It really is very solid and robust compared to the F-16. The first landing was already better than most of my landings in the Viper. I was genuinly impressed.”

Job
His job nonetheless, is to see if he can find anything wrong with it. “At Edwards, we find out how the aircraft behaves in an operational environment. We are all experienced weapon school graduates, but we are not test pilots. We develop, test and validate tactics that make the best use of the aircraft’s capabilities. There’s no reason for us not to be critical towards the aircraft. It is after all the aircraft Dutch pilots will go to war in for the considerable future.”

Air combat
According to Knight – who flew against a herd of modern fighter jets – not much seems wrong when it comes to air combat manoeuvring (ACM) in the F-35. “The F-35 performs similarly to the F-16 and F-18 and has it’s own strengths and weakneses. We try to take advantage of those strengths while avoiding that part of the envelope where other aircraft can beat us. That is what operational testing is all about: you take the aircraft with all it’s inherent strengths and weaknesses and come up with the best way to execute the mission.”

World of awareness
The F-35 can stand its own against F-16s, F-18s and probably the like. But were the stealthy Lightning II really shines, is being the eye in the sky that shares information with other aircraft, striking targets itself when needed and defeating or misleading threats before they get anywhere near. “This aircraft provides another world of situational awareness. Compared to that, the F-16’s capabilities are rudimentary and obsolete”, states Knight

Last year, the Dutch F-35s flew complex missions with their F-16 predecessors. The main focus was fourth and fifth generation fighter integration and interoperability. “It was a great experience and good to see the added value of the F-35. One F-16 pilot even described our F-35 capability as flipping on a light switch: without F-35s in the fight they were struggling in the dark, with F-35s by their side they had very high situational awareness.”...

...Feedback
What is there constantly in the F-35, is buffeting. It could be regarded as unwanted but it has its advantages, says Knight. “The vibrations are noticable for the pilot, but they are also a way of getting feedback. It’s like the jet is talking to you, a sort of flying by the seat of the pants. We are curious to know the effect of the vibrations on gun accuracy, though....

Source: http://airheadsfly.com/2016/02/09/f-35- ... t-numbers/


This! :devil:

Ian "Gladys" Knight nailed it!

Looks like the RNLAF F35 fighter pilots have no doubt that The Netherlands have bought the right aircraft after initial operational testing (this not even block 3F capability yet!).

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 03:18
by armedupdate
Is the F-35's acceleration better or the same or less than F-16. I believe this shows the F-35's acceleration is slightly less. Are the fighters loaded or not?
Image

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 04:22
by cantaz
Mac covered the acceleration issue on his blog. IIRC, a F-16 with clean except 2 wingtip AMRAAMs was the official program baseline, with a fully internally loaded F-35A being 8ish seconds slower. Thus the above table's "Tactical Mnvr Wt" where the F-35A is equal to a clean Viper (very close in drag to Viper + wingtip loads) is likely 50% fuel, possibly after bomb release (or pure AtA load).

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 04:51
by geforcerfx
cantaz wrote:Mac covered the acceleration issue on his blog. IIRC, a F-16 with clean except 2 wingtip AMRAAMs was the official program baseline, with a fully internally loaded F-35A being 8ish seconds slower. Thus the above table's "Tactical Mnvr Wt" where the F-35A is equal to a clean Viper (very close in drag to Viper + wingtip loads) is likely 50% fuel, possibly after bomb release (or pure AtA load).


I would say 50% fuel load, that puts them, numbers wise pretty even with the F-16 having slightly better T/W and the F-35 having better wing loading.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 09:01
by element1loop
optimist wrote:The f-35 firing its own or another f-35's missile, might not be first choice. The USMC say ARGUS and sm's are there to be used and ships carry a few more missiles than a plane.


I have doubts about that 'Optimist' (despite the strong prevailing move to Joint engagements), for instance SM2 has a surface attack and even land attack capability but have they been used that way? Not to my knowledge. Why? My supposition is because ASM weapons have proliferated so much that no one wants to empty a VLS cell and use them for something other than naval defense if there's another weapon option available to hit a target. Maybe the US could get away with doing it, maybe, but I don't think anyone else can. Or that SMs will be first cab off the rank for assisting in an A2A fight. I could be wrong here but I don't see it panning out that way in a battle, where ships are also exposed and where their own magazine depletion state is critically important. Better off putting more and better missiles on the fighters.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 12:15
by popcorn
Anither consideation.You can buy 4 X AIM-120D for the cost of a single SM-6.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 14:53
by sferrin
element1loop wrote:
optimist wrote:The f-35 firing its own or another f-35's missile, might not be first choice. The USMC say ARGUS and sm's are there to be used and ships carry a few more missiles than a plane.


I have doubts about that 'Optimist' (despite the strong prevailing move to Joint engagements), for instance SM2 has a surface attack and even land attack capability but have they been used that way?


SM-2s have been used many times against ships/boats. Land targets less so (for obvious reasons). There was going to be an SM-4, an SM-2 specifically modified for precision land attack, but it was cancelled. Too small a warhead and couldn't hit a moving target on land. But SM-2s against boats? Yep.



They've also done them during SINKEXs. Also during Operation Praying Mantis they sunk several Iranian gunboats with them. A quote from that incident regarding the SM-2s in this role was, "by the time the Harpoons got there they were already under water".

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 17:33
by element1loop
Ack! :mrgreen: That's a nice warhead, thank you sferrin.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 19:10
by basher54321
armedupdate wrote:Is the F-35's acceleration better or the same or less than F-16. I believe this shows the F-35's acceleration is slightly less. Are the fighters loaded or not?


The comments given out by the pilots don't really tell us much without the context behind it:

RNLAF (Gladys Knight)HTTP://AIRHEADSFLY.COM/2016/01/26/DUTCH-LIGHTNING-TESTERS/
“Even so, slow-speed and high angle-of-attack performance is much better than many fourth generation fighters like the F-16. High angle of attack testing has been an eye-opener for previous F-16 pilots, who are not used to very good slow speed performance. Straight line acceleration is also much better.

RNLAF (Col De Smit) Air Int Vol 88
When comparing performance, I would say that the F-35 turns like an F-16 with pylon tanks; but it climbs, descends & accelerates like a clean F-16.

So although they appear contradictory it's likely they are both actually telling the truth - e.g. Knight could be referring to A-G configuration.
An F-16 with wingtanks also accelerates "like" a clean F-16 under M1.0 but over that you get a massive amount of drag that will slow it down compared to the F-35.

There is also the issue of what F-16 are you comparing with? In the earlier leaked report the Block 40 likely had a better T/D & T/W over the F-16AMs used by the RNLAF.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 20:52
by armedupdate
Is there huge difference between straight line acceleration and turning acceleration?

So basically I read, the F-35 is better at everything except sustained turn rate?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 21:08
by wrightwing
derphurf wrote:
armedupdate wrote:
derphurf wrote:The F35 in WVR combat really sounds just like a Hornet. Especially in a multiple bandit or 2 v 2, 3 v 3 engagement, it seems like the F-16 should be able to hold its own or more if it sticks to energy fighting basics. Any Hornet that can't keep up with its nose pointing is going to get nailed by gun or AIM-9X.

The problem is the F-35 has similar acceleration to the F-16. The reason why the F-16 can do nasty speed tricks against the Hornet because it retains energy much better. However against the F-35, the F-35 is similar but the F-35 has better AoA and deceleration. So the F-35 is more capable than the F-16 in that reguard.


Based on talks by F35 drivers, the F-16 still holds the advantage in retaining energy, however. Any high AOA manuever you do automatically puts you in a lower energy state

That's if the F-35 driver uses high AoA. The F-16 doesn't have that option. The F-35 can do EM or high AoA.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 22:09
by basher54321
armedupdate wrote:Is there huge difference between straight line acceleration and turning acceleration?


Yes a lot. When you turn a lot more drag is created so you are more likely to decelerate in a turn than accelerate.


armedupdate wrote:
So basically I read, the F-35 is better at everything except sustained turn rate?



Based on what has gone so far the places where the F-35A likely shines in performance over F-16 types.

Transonic & Supersonic acceleration and climb (All internal configs apart from light A-A)
Max speed (All internal configs apart from light A-A)
Max ITR (at slower speeds)
50 degree production AoA limit
Nose authority and control at high AoA


Even with the new information the overall assessment hasn't really changed much.

The F-35C would likely have the same traits but likely be better at high AoA handling and have a better Max ITR. I don't expect it to accelerate / climb like the F-35A though.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 22:38
by armedupdate
So when the quotes say the F-35 turns worse than the F-16(turns like F-16 with tanks) they don't mean the F-35 has poorer turning acceleration?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 22:52
by geforcerfx
armedupdate wrote:So when the quotes say the F-35 turns worse than the F-16(turns like F-16 with tanks) they don't mean the F-35 has poorer turning acceleration?


I am no expert, so the experts feel free to correct me. But from what have seen ( airshows and flight sims) you don't usually accelerate in a high itr turn, usually I would decellerate until i was producing enough thrust to maintain speed at that turn rate (this is in a sim). The f-35 might have a slower speed at the same turn rate as a f-16, that be what they refering too.

The F-35C would likely have the same traits but likely be better at high AoA handling and have a better Max ITR. I don't expect it to accelerate / climb like the F-35A though.


There a quote frm a test pilot ( I think beesley) saying the C had the best sustained. I think that will change in 3f where the A has full capabilty and the C is still at 7g vs 9g

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 23:24
by optimist
armedupdate wrote:Is there huge difference between straight line acceleration and turning acceleration?

So basically I read, the F-35 is better at everything except sustained turn rate?

throw some tanks and a bomb on the f-16 and see it's turn rate from the f-16 flight manual online. it won't be pretty.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 23:31
by basher54321
geforcerfx wrote:
There a quote frm a test pilot ( I think beesley) saying the C had the best sustained. I think that will change in 3f where the A has full capabilty and the C is still at 7g vs 9g


Do you have the quote? because 5000 lbs heavier, loads more drag with the same engine!! says to me good luck with that :D

When talking about sustained turns - that is ability by definition for an aircraft to pull a turn while sustaining the same energy (altitude + Speed) level. So no pulling 9G instead of 7G wont actually affect sustained turn rates at speeds where you expect BFM to typically happen (because the G required to sustain is normally much lower).

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 23:37
by armedupdate
Isn't climb rate comparison a good comparison of acceleration?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2016, 23:50
by Dragon029
Here's a way to look at it, in order to match the same turn rates (remembering that a turn rate is the change in your flight vector, not how fast you can point your nose), the F-35 has to utilise higher angles of attack than the F-16, just simply because things like body lift are more reliant on higher angles of attack to generate the necessary pressure differences, energised vortex flows, etc.

During a quick turn, that higher angle of attack of the F-35 results in a larger amount of drag; in other words, it's lift-to-drag ratio is lower than that of the clean or lightly loaded F-16's. Now here's the thing; this isn't a linear relationship; it's something like this (with the specifics dependent on the design of the wing and airframe):

Image

When an F-35 drops its nose / decreases its angle of attack however and powers out of a turn, drag drops dramatically and the F-35's lift-to-drag ratio and thrust-to-drag ratios increase to put it on a similar footing to a clean F-16.

To reiterate; when you're at a high angle of attack, you're going to bleed energy (unless you're moving at a low airspeed and have a lot of thrust; think of a Hornet doing a slow, high alpha pass at an airshow). The core difference between the F-16 and F-35 is that to attain the same turn rates, the F-35 needs to use a greater angle of attack, although the F-35 has the advantage of being able to continue increasing its angle of attack until it reaches its maximum lift (note: not the same as maximum lift-to-drag) angle of somewhere around 40 degrees. That (as already established) allows the F-35, like the Super Hornet and a few other fighters, to snap it's nose up, to rapidly get its guns on the enemy, albeit for a short period and at the expense of airspeed.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2016, 00:00
by basher54321
armedupdate wrote:So when the quotes say the F-35 turns worse than the F-16(turns like F-16 with tanks) they don't mean the F-35 has poorer turning acceleration?



In a horizontal turn (for example) you can accelerate (gain energy) if you are not turning by much. But if you decide to turn more and keep pulling back on the stick eventually you will start decelerating even at max thrust (losing energy). However there is a point in between this where you neither gain or lose airspeed thus you sustain the turn at the same speed.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2016, 00:27
by castlebravo
basher54321 wrote:
armedupdate wrote:So when the quotes say the F-35 turns worse than the F-16(turns like F-16 with tanks) they don't mean the F-35 has poorer turning acceleration?



In a horizontal turn (for example) you can accelerate (gain energy) if you are not turning by much. But if you decide to turn more and keep pulling back on the stick eventually you will start decelerating even at max thrust (losing energy). However there is a point in between this where you neither gain or lose airspeed thus you sustain the turn at the same speed.


It should also be pointed out that this slight decrease in sustained turn rate compared to the F-16C will only exist when the Viper is lightly loaded, and the difference will be quite small compared to the large advantage in high AoA performance the F-35A enjoys.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2016, 08:01
by endre
An aspect that many forget here is that F-16s (at least our old models) also carry other systems with them beyond weapons and fuel on actual missions, such as a self-defence jammer and a targeting pod. These also place restrictions on the aircraft, but on the F-35 those same capabilities are included in the basic design, and can naturally be carried without any additional penalty.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 06 Mar 2016, 09:52
by tincansailor
This report is the best news supporters of the F-35 have gotten in a long time. All fighter pilots train to use the strengths of their aircraft vs. a known opponent. It shows any F-35 critic willing to listen that Lightning II pilots will have a load of tools in their bag of tricks. We've always known the F-35 had superior low speed maneuverability, and could operate at a much higher AoA then any other current fighter, but to hear it can out preform the F-16 in most areas is very impressive.

I've always suspected the F-35 could out dive the F-16, which should give it more options to execute Yo Yo Attacks, or to just get the hell out of Dodge. Now we see it has many options in taking on the F-16, or any other opponents. I'd like to see the F-35 take on the F-18E and beat it at it's own High AoA game. If it can do that it should be able to handle the various SU-27 derivatives. By the time the Indian's return to Red Flag with their SU-30MKI's the F-35A should be a participant. The post mortem on those encounters should be very interesting.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 07 Mar 2016, 10:41
by charlielima223
tincansailor wrote:If it can do that it should be able to handle the various SU-27 derivatives. By the time the Indian's return to Red Flag with their SU-30MKI's the F-35A should be a participant. The post mortem on those encounters should be very interesting.


I would imagine it would look something like this. :)

THIS IS ALL A WORK OF FICTION
AF Times
F-35s Overwhelming and Revolutionized Red Flag
By TSgt Joe Snuffy

F-35s with the USAF Fighter Weapon School of Nellis AFB were the first to partake in Red Flag. Though all participating pilots of the F-35s graduated the USAF Fighter Weapon School in the F-35, their main objective was to apply what they have learned and to further develop and refine the curriculum of future Lightning II pilots. The experience gained from the pilots and maintainers of the F-35 will go a long way to better provide more knowledge to other F-35 units.

As usual Air Force units from around the US attended Red Flag as well as EA-18G Growlers from the USN. US Navy Growlers for the first time got to work in a mass exercise with the US Air Force's version of the F-35; the F-35A. EWOs of the Growlers were astounded by the effect the F-35 had for their aircraft. "The biggest difference that we noticed was the synergetic effect the F-35s had for our role. The F-35s advanced passive sensors gathered all the data we needed and then communicated to us what we had to do. It definitely made my life easier". Not to be out done, the F-35 also had a few tricks up its sleeves to assist the Growlers. "I didn't believe it until I saw it but the F-35 was doing almost as much EW as we were. It was easier for them because they are stealthy".

The F-35 is the largest international partnership and military contract in history. Many nations participating in this years Red Flag at Nellis AFB are nations that are getting their own F-35s. Nations such as Australia, Denmark, England, and South Korea.

RAF Typhoons who will soon be flying and operating with their own F-35Bs had a chance to really see what they had waiting for them. RAF Typhoon pilot John "Cricket" Edward had this to say. "We're currently building our own fleet of F-35s. This was our first chance to see what they can really do and I have to say I am impressed. Its capabilities were far more than what I expected". The knowledge gained from these Typhoon pilots will greatly assist them in developing tactics for their own fleet of F-35s.

F-35s were designed to network with other aircraft and platforms creating a level of connectivity and synergy that is unlike anything before it. More impressive is the synergetic effect that F-35 has with other F-35s as well as the F-22 Raptor. Raptors have been flying at Red Flag for some time now and with the F-35; one pilot put as "night and day". Major K, an F-22 pilot of 4 years with over 500 hours in the F-22 had more to learn. "We've been flying at Red Flag for some time now and we thought we had a good handle on things. We've refined tactics in the F-22 but what the F-35 brings, we might as well start writing a new book". Captain J another F-22 pilot with 1 combat deployment during OIR was impressed with what the F-35 brings to the table. "This was one of the hardest Red Flags I've participated in. Not so much because of our opponents but because of the learning curve". F-35s along with F-22s created a deadly effect. F-16 Aggressor pilot Lt.Col "Soup" Campbell says, "Every time those two aircraft were together; it was like flying into a brick wall. My aircraft is great in a close range dogfight but with those two I couldn't even get there".

Also attending this years Red Flag again were Su-30MKIs from India. This would be their third time in Red Flag at Nellis since 2016. The Su-30MKIs had new electronics and an upgraded engine. Indian pilots were surprised with the F-35. The Su-30MKIs performed as they expected but the F-35 was more than they were ready for. Indian pilots were excited to fly with the F-35 but they showed less enthusiasm when they flew against it. An Indian pilot of the Su-30MKI described it as "very challenging". India will be getting their own stealth aircraft but theirs is a partnership with Russian aerospace company Sukhoi currently testing and developing their HAL FGFA.

With just its first appearance the F-35 Lightning II has already made it's mark on Red Flag. After action reports have all claimed that the F-35 was "overwhelming" and "revolutionary". Despite this the F-35 pilots and maintainers still confess that they have a long way to go. USAF Fighter Weapon School instructor as well as F-35 pilot had this to say, "I have a feeling this is just the tip of the iceberg. We'll be flying this jet for years to come so we still have more to learn".

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 12 Mar 2016, 13:19
by mixelflick
Finally! Lockheed Martin should be taking the comments by F16, F22, Typhoon and SU-30MKI pilots and shouting them to the moon!

Very insightful. Thanks for sharing... :)

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 12 Mar 2016, 14:23
by count_to_10
mixelflick wrote:Finally! Lockheed Martin should be taking the comments by F16, F22, Typhoon and SU-30MKI pilots and shouting them to the moon!

Very insightful. Thanks for sharing... :)

I hate to break it to you, but I think you missed the disclaimer.
THIS IS ALL A WORK OF FICTION

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 01:13
by charlielima223
count_to_10 wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Finally! Lockheed Martin should be taking the comments by F16, F22, Typhoon and SU-30MKI pilots and shouting them to the moon!

Very insightful. Thanks for sharing... :)

I hate to break it to you, but I think you missed the disclaimer.
THIS IS ALL A WORK OF FICTION


hahaha I should have put the disclaimer in bold print, underlined, larger font, and brighter color. I wonder though..

critics and stupid media just take one small bit of information than twists the facts with a large dose of imagination and fiction to spin a story. I wonder if I could do the same and put out this work of fiction in some blog or comment section and let people run around with it?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 01:29
by spazsinbad
Delete this from the fiction: "...since 2016...." and you would be good to go. However... this just adds to the problems of fiction and fact about the F-35... and YMMV.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 01:44
by mixelflick
Bummer.

And I wondered why I could't find it via google! :)

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 04 Aug 2016, 02:27
by zerion
Nevermind

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 02:52
by boogieman
So quite some time has passed since this was doing the rounds. Curious to know if anyone is aware of additional context/detail having emerged in the intervening years about the test and how the jet's handling qualities have evolved since? My understanding is that the software load only permitted max 7g maneuvers and the CLAW were inhibiting key inputs at the time(?).

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 03:49
by alloycowboy
boogieman wrote:So quite some time has passed since this was doing the rounds. Curious to know if anyone is aware of additional context/detail having emerged in the intervening years about the test and how the jet's handling qualities have evolved since? My understanding is that the software load only permitted max 7g maneuvers and the CLAW were inhibiting key inputs at the time(?).


Bascily it comes down to fuel fraction and physics with the F-35 being full of gas (18500 lbs) and heavy while the F-16 being light (aprox. 4500lbs) of gas and very maneuverable.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 04:31
by spazsinbad
boogieman wrote:So quite some time has passed since this was doing the rounds. Curious to know if anyone is aware of additional context/detail having emerged in the intervening years about the test and how the jet's handling qualities have evolved since? My understanding is that the software load only permitted max 7g maneuvers and the CLAW were inhibiting key inputs at the time(?).

A lot of comment water has gone under the bridge in other F-35 sub forums about this particular topic since 2015. I'm being ironic: it is good that you resurrect a zombie thread so that another endless discussion about dogfighting starts.

44 page thread on topic: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27186 F-35 Flies Against F-16 In Basic Fighter Maneuvers

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 04:39
by boogieman
Yes, apologies for the necro - the topic came up elsewhere and I couldn't resist the urge to get the input of the F16.net brains trust. I will behave myself and look into the link you posted - much obliged :wink:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 04:57
by spazsinbad
You can amuse yourself until the end of time by just searching for DOGFIGHT in the F-35 forum alone - let alone internet.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 06:35
by alloycowboy
boogieman wrote:Yes, apologies for the necro - the topic came up elsewhere and I couldn't resist the urge to get the input of the F16.net brains trust. I will behave myself and look into the link you posted - much obliged :wink:


@boogieman... The best anology for this doubling on a bicycle with a skinny girl vs a fat girl, which is easier to do?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Sep 2020, 17:21
by wrightwing
boogieman wrote:So quite some time has passed since this was doing the rounds. Curious to know if anyone is aware of additional context/detail having emerged in the intervening years about the test and how the jet's handling qualities have evolved since? My understanding is that the software load only permitted max 7g maneuvers and the CLAW were inhibiting key inputs at the time(?).

It wasn't a dogfight, or any sort of agility comparison. It was ONLY ever a CLAW test. The F-35 in question had a 3.5G limit st the time, and the entire point of the test was to ensure the CLAW worked properly, so that the envelope could be opened up.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 10:35
by element1loop
Anyone who's interested in VLO A2A combat isn't going to spend much time considering offensive gun ACM tactics. >99% of A2A fighter kills during F-35's operational life-cycle will be due to a missile (and support systems). IMO, agility, acceleration and better altitude performance, combined with peerless SA, matters much more for 5th-gen missile fights, than for 4th-gen gun fights. It's just not as obvious.

The F-35 pilot is high, stable, fuel-efficient, has not been tracked, has lower stress, clearer thinking, has excess dry engine thrust margin and much lower drag, which means pilot does not need to run the burner unless and until targeted. First-look, first-shot + mission data files = killer advantage.

F-35A can basically fly around like an F-117A (only higher), and still win A2A with a passive EOTS lock. The F-16 must use its burner and it will be lit up like a Christmas tree. It also can not hold yaw to change aspect and disappear from a radar track. F-16 has no MDF to indicate where the pilot can get away with flying the jet, and it will have much higher drag from external stores, meaning it'll turn corners and accelerate like a comparative school bus, compared to the F-35A, in a real missile fight.

Which kinda makes F-16's turn radius performance completely irrelevant to winning in 2020 A2A fighting.

F-35A performance is needed to defeat missiles, and most of that is done via LO, plus radius and aspect management (MDFs again) and direction and altitude change if fired on, plus EW. So basically the F-35 pilot is not going to be thinking an F-16 has any chance to beat it. It's entirely possible to fly the F-35 in a way to deny the F-16 any advantage at all. And why wouldn't you?

An F-16 pilot will not even want to be in the air when facing F-35A. It was bad enough MiG29s running from Legacy teen fighters, but F-16 pilots would make like a bait-ball, and not even know which way to turn to run away.

The whole ACM comparison thing is now irrelevant.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 13:18
by madrat
F-35A has an internal gun. That speaks volumes.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 13:39
by hornetfinn
element1loop wrote:Which kinda makes F-16's turn radius performance completely irrelevant to winning in 2020 A2A fighting.

F-35A performance is needed to defeat missiles, and most of that is done via LO, plus radius and aspect management (MDFs again) and direction and altitude change if fired on, plus EW. So basically the F-35 pilot is not going to be thinking an F-16 has any chance to beat it. It's entirely possible to fly the F-35 in a way to deny the F-16 any advantage at all. And why wouldn't you?


I agree and I'd add DAS, networking, advanced sensor fusion with automated control of sensors and one of the best countermeasures packages around (chaff, flares, towed decoys and DIRCM in the future) to the equation. F-35 pilot will have a superb SA all the time no matter what it goes against. This includes knowing when a missile is launched against it and keeps a constant eye on that missile or any number of missiles. With the F-35 sensor suite and sensor fusion, it will detect, track and identify all targets faster and more accurately than pretty much anything flying now or in the near future. This includes both friendly and enemy aircraft and missiles. I think all this will have very profound effect on aerial combat with F-35 no matter if it's BVR or even WVR dogfight situation. F-35 maneuverability is built around these capabilties and it's obviously very good even on legacy metrics like STR and ITR. But the maneuverability is mostly there to both allow faster engagements by itself and avoid possible enemy missiles shot at it. I think the capabilities of F-35 will get comparatively better and better with more complex and difficult situations with large number of threat systems and friendly units.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2020, 23:29
by boogieman
Yes, for the record everyone is preaching to the converted for my part. BFM becomes even more redundant when you consider pairing AIM260 with DAS. If the latter is agile enough (seems likely) even a solitary F35 will have a 360 degree WEZ in WVR. Without so much as turning their head, the pilot simply picks their target from the list and fires, with no maneuvering into a firing position required.

That said, I think the reality here is something that “Chip” Berke captured rather well on the Fighter Pilot Podcast’s F35 episode – BFM is generally a bad way to obtain favourable kill ratios for everyone nowadays. Even if you are winning a (vanishingly rare) in-the-phonebooth turning fight you are still anchoring yourself to a single opponent to the detriment of your energy state and SA. In an operational context this constitutes a gift-wrapped invitation for other bandits to pick you off from outside that phonebooth.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2020, 00:24
by element1loop
madrat wrote:F-35A has an internal gun. That speaks volumes.


Not really, its what's required for intercept action short of shooting down an aircraft, such as ADIZ intercepts and warnings to non compliant aircraft flying over restricted airspace, etc. Without a gun, what's the next option? What does speak volumes is the lack of a USAF gun shoot-down since the Vietnam war.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2020, 05:19
by steve2267
Then there was that interview with a (younger) Panther driver and the question was asked, something about tactics and techniques to enable the F-35 to gun enema aircraft from out-of-the-proverbial-LO-sun such that the enema never new he was a target. The topic arose as a way that Panther drivers might increase their magazine capacity given their internal AA missile loadout of four slammers (at that time.) As I recall... the reply was a wink and a nod... or I think the young pilot just smiled.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2020, 11:26
by hornetfinn
boogieman wrote:Yes, for the record everyone is preaching to the converted for my part. BFM becomes even more redundant when you consider pairing AIM260 with DAS. If the latter is agile enough (seems likely) even a solitary F35 will have a 360 degree WEZ in WVR. Without so much as turning their head, the pilot simply picks their target from the list and fires, with no maneuvering into a firing position required.

That said, I think the reality here is something that “Chip” Berke captured rather well on the Fighter Pilot Podcast’s F35 episode – BFM is generally a bad way to obtain favourable kill ratios for everyone nowadays. Even if you are winning a (vanishingly rare) in-the-phonebooth turning fight you are still anchoring yourself to a single opponent to the detriment of your energy state and SA. In an operational context this constitutes a gift-wrapped invitation for other bandits to pick you off from outside that phonebooth.


Totally agree. I see DAS as a really great system which gives totally new and unique capabilities. Like you said, over the shoulder shots will be totally possible using it. This kind of capabilities have already been demonstrated by legacy fighters using either off-board targeting like another fighter or pilot looking at target. DAS just makes this targeting capability far more effective, much faster and much more precise. Of course off-board targeting and helmet-cueing can still be used also. But DAS has constant full sphrere vision with uniform resolution while a human pilot can only see about 1/3 of that in low resolution (peripheral vision) with something like 1/1000 of that in high resolution. Naturally DAS can also track almost limitless number of targets in all directions whereas human being can only track a very low number of targets in basically one direction. And Next-Generation DAS will have twice the range and was it 5 times the resolution. That's pretty impressive given that no other fighter has anything like the current DAS nor are they planned. Of course F-22 and Rafale have MLDs with spherical view, but they are really only MLD/MAW systems which is only small portion of DAS capabilities.

Of course turning the fighter towards the target has the benefit of giving the missile longer range and more energy to go after the target as the missile doesn't need to turn while the short-burning rocket motor is burning. Here I see the high instantaneous turn rate and high-AoA capability very useful. But I think that kind of maneuvering will be very rare in F-35 as it indicates that the F-35 was somehow surprised and I think it will be very hard to do with all the systems it has.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2020, 11:46
by boogieman
hornetfinn wrote:Totally agree. I see DAS as a really great system which gives totally new and unique capabilities. Like you said, over the shoulder shots will be totally possible using it. This kind of capabilities have already been demonstrated by legacy fighters using either off-board targeting like another fighter or pilot looking at target. DAS just makes this targeting capability far more effective, much faster and much more precise. Of course off-board targeting and helmet-cueing can still be used also. But DAS has constant full sphrere vision with uniform resolution while a human pilot can only see about 1/3 of that in low resolution (peripheral vision) with something like 1/1000 of that in high resolution. Naturally DAS can also track almost limitless number of targets in all directions whereas human being can only track a very low number of targets in basically one direction. And Next-Generation DAS will have twice the range and was it 5 times the resolution. That's pretty impressive given that no other fighter has anything like the current DAS nor are they planned. Of course F-22 and Rafale have MLDs with spherical view, but they are really only MLD/MAW systems which is only small portion of DAS capabilities.

Agreed. To my mind there have been a number of paradigm shifts in the domain of WVR combat. From guns to (mostly rear aspect) guided missiles. From rear aspect to (reliable) all aspect missiles. From basic all aspect missiles to HOBS + HMD. Now we are moving from HOBS to spherical missile cueing, where the HMD is an optional component.
hornetfinn wrote:Of course turning the fighter towards the target has the benefit of giving the missile longer range and more energy to go after the target as the missile doesn't need to turn while the short-burning rocket motor is burning. Here I see the high instantaneous turn rate and high-AoA capability very useful. But I think that kind of maneuvering will be very rare in F-35 as it indicates that the F-35 was somehow surprised and I think it will be very hard to do with all the systems it has.

Agreed, although with a missile like JATM even this may not be necessary. If it has the agility (TVC), it ought to have both the speed and the range to nail anything in the WVR arena pretty much regardless of aspect or orientation. Pointing the nose at the target is always preferable of course but we are poised to reach a point where pK will be well and truly high enough without it.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 24 Sep 2020, 16:46
by element1loop
boogieman wrote: Agreed. To my mind there have been a number of paradigm shifts in the domain of WVR combat.


The subjective concept of WVR fighting and tactics is being made meaningless as well by the combo of spherical and long-ranging IRSTs, plus day and night long range remote 'visual' imaging observation. Plus IR WVR missiles that can now reach past the range of an AIM-120A. Plus BVR range and tactics has become a 'visual' imaging fight now. F-35 has knocked down these divisions and done the same thing, as per the recent discussion about ARH and SARH losing, or blurring their meaning, also.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2020, 17:20
by maro.kyo
I mean ever since the FA-18E/F the doctrine was way more focused on the post-stall agility maneuvers than sustained. The question would rather be if it's possible to install the rails for sidewinders on the doors of the weapon bay so that F-35 could launch those missiles while pulling off those impressive high AOA maneuvers. We all know that the integration of ASRAAM and Sidewinder internally was cancelled a few years ago so I wonder if they have plans in the near future. Or maybe it's just that its unnecessary all together. TBH I would arm my F-35s with 4 AMRAAMs or 6 after the upgrade even when I have the choice to have 2 Sidewinders instead.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2020, 19:42
by alloycowboy
maro.kyo wrote:I mean ever since the FA-18E/F the doctrine was way more focused on the post-stall agility maneuvers than sustained. The question would rather be if it's possible to install the rails for sidewinders on the doors of the weapon bay so that F-35 could launch those missiles while pulling off those impressive high AOA maneuvers. We all know that the integration of ASRAAM and Sidewinder internally was cancelled a few years ago so I wonder if they have plans in the near future. Or maybe it's just that its unnecessary all together. TBH I would arm my F-35s with 4 AMRAAMs or 6 after the upgrade even when I have the choice to have 2 Sidewinders instead.


I think you missed the point. If you get into a dog fight in a stealth fighter you did something drastically wrong. Also you don't want to get anywhere near the stall speed in a dogfight as that would make you a sitting duck.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2020, 21:27
by maro.kyo
alloycowboy wrote:
maro.kyo wrote:I mean ever since the FA-18E/F the doctrine was way more focused on the post-stall agility maneuvers than sustained. The question would rather be if it's possible to install the rails for sidewinders on the doors of the weapon bay so that F-35 could launch those missiles while pulling off those impressive high AOA maneuvers. We all know that the integration of ASRAAM and Sidewinder internally was cancelled a few years ago so I wonder if they have plans in the near future. Or maybe it's just that its unnecessary all together. TBH I would arm my F-35s with 4 AMRAAMs or 6 after the upgrade even when I have the choice to have 2 Sidewinders instead.


I think you missed the point. If you get into a dog fight in a stealth fighter you did something drastically wrong. Also you don't want to get anywhere near the stall speed in a dogfight as that would make you a sitting duck.


That is correct but you know, we are discussing that very ultra slim possibility of F-35 actually being put in a dogfight. Also, Thanks to all the off bore aiming techniques and high-g SRAAMs post-stall maneuvers have more importance than what you might think. But I do agree that getting into the situation where you have to do those post-stall maneuvers or dogfights in the first place is quite a desperate one. Thus

TBH I would arm my F-35s with 4 AMRAAMs or 6 after the upgrade even when I have the choice to have 2 Sidewinders instead.


this.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2020, 22:38
by squirrelshoes
Perhaps the next AAM to enter production will have a dual-mode seeker.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 17 Oct 2020, 22:49
by marauder2048
squirrelshoes wrote:Perhaps the next AAM to enter production will have a dual-mode seeker.


Yeah. It's called JATM. It was mentioned upthread.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2020, 02:41
by XanderCrews
boogieman wrote: From guns to (mostly rear aspect) guided missiles. From rear aspect to (reliable) all aspect missiles. From basic all aspect missiles to HOBS + HMD. Now we are moving from HOBS to spherical missile cueing, where the HMD is an optional component.


yep

Phase 1: turn the airplane

Phase 2: turn your head

Phase 3. no need to turn anything

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2020, 03:17
by spazsinbad
PHASE ???: via HMDS & a button click pilot can view vHUD 6 O'clock volume with notations....

http://www.slideshare.net/robbinlaird/t ... t/download (PDF 0.5Mb) [now attached bekuz SLIDEs go OFF soon]

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2020, 17:37
by milosh
alloycowboy wrote:I think you missed the point. If you get into a dog fight in a stealth fighter you did something drastically wrong. Also you don't want to get anywhere near the stall speed in a dogfight as that would make you a sitting duck.


Against non stealth yes but if both sides have decent number of stealth fighters then you will surely have stealth dogfights.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2020, 21:21
by spazsinbad
milosh wrote:
alloycowboy wrote:I think you missed the point. If you get into a dog fight in a stealth fighter you did something drastically wrong. Also you don't want to get anywhere near the stall speed in a dogfight as that would make you a sitting duck.

Against non stealth yes but if both sides have decent number of stealth fighters then you will surely have stealth dogfights.

WOTIF my stealth is better than your stealth?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 18 Oct 2020, 22:43
by boogieman
As has been said upthread, there is an important distinction to be made between within-visual-range (WVR) engagements and what we might ordinarily consider "dogfights" (where opposing aircraft jockey for a firing position at each other's 6 o'clock). While the former may well remain a distinct possibility, it is not the same thing as the latter. We're now reaching a point where "ultra-HOBS" is becoming a thing, meaning that you can now shoot (and kill) the guy on your tail. This completely turns the idea of a "dogfight" on its head, because it nullifies the 6 o'clock/rear aspect control zone upon which traditional dogfighting is predicated.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2020, 00:33
by spazsinbad
boogieman wrote:As has been said upthread, there is an important distinction to be made between within-visual-range (WVR) engagements and what we might ordinarily consider "dogfights" (where opposing aircraft jockey for a firing position at each other's 6 o'clock). While the former may well remain a distinct possibility, it is not the same thing as the latter. We're now reaching a point where "ultra-HOBS" is becoming a thing, meaning that you can now shoot (and kill) the guy on your tail. This completely turns the idea of a "dogfight" on its head, because it nullifies the 6 o'clock/rear aspect control zone upon which traditional dogfighting is predicated.

BEKUZ: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=27497&p=445838&hilit=bekuz#p445838 & download/file.php?id=33628

Image

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2020, 15:19
by hornetfinn
boogieman wrote:As has been said upthread, there is an important distinction to be made between within-visual-range (WVR) engagements and what we might ordinarily consider "dogfights" (where opposing aircraft jockey for a firing position at each other's 6 o'clock). While the former may well remain a distinct possibility, it is not the same thing as the latter. We're now reaching a point where "ultra-HOBS" is becoming a thing, meaning that you can now shoot (and kill) the guy on your tail. This completely turns the idea of a "dogfight" on its head, because it nullifies the 6 o'clock/rear aspect control zone upon which traditional dogfighting is predicated.


Another thing is that a fighter can give targeting info to another friendly fighter or even air defence system and let them kill the bandit if needed. Especially with F-35 because it has the sensors and data link systems and networked sensor fusion to do that very precisely, automatically and quickly. Firing unit does not even need to see the target itself as the F-35 is likely able to give it very precise targeting info. Of course other aircraft have also demonstrated this kind of capability, but I think F-35 is a lot better system to use the capability in real combat and in most complex situations.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2020, 16:09
by quicksilver
boogieman wrote:As has been said upthread, there is an important distinction to be made between within-visual-range (WVR) engagements and what we might ordinarily consider "dogfights" (where opposing aircraft jockey for a firing position at each other's 6 o'clock). While the former may well remain a distinct possibility, it is not the same thing as the latter. We're now reaching a point where "ultra-HOBS" is becoming a thing, meaning that you can now shoot (and kill) the guy on your tail. This completely turns the idea of a "dogfight" on its head, because it nullifies the 6 o'clock/rear aspect control zone upon which traditional dogfighting is predicated.


x2

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 19 Oct 2020, 23:01
by boogieman
I'd add that if you are flying against an opponent with a spherical missile cueing capability and suddenly find yourself in a WVR fight with them, your first priority is probably going to be to extend out of it again, possibly using your own over-the-shoulder shots to at least create separation. This is for the simple reason that you are almost certainly within the NEZ of their medium (& possibly short) range AAMs and are therefore in dire straits.

The problem is not unlike flying directly over a SAM site ie. it is time to run for your flipping life. The only exception to this might be if you can get inside the bandit's missile Rmin, but that still leaves you open to being shot at by a third party. All in all, WVR is becoming a terrible place to fight (and win) across the board.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 20 Oct 2020, 00:14
by quicksilver
We’ve had this discussion around here before; the consequence of these new/emerging capabilities is that the boundaries that once defined where bvr ended and wvr began are being dramatically altered. Increasingly, where opposing aircraft each get a missile off of the rail, the probability of a ‘mutual kill’ is frighteningly high.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 20 Oct 2020, 01:34
by madrat
quicksilver wrote:We’ve had this discussion around here before; the consequence of these new/emerging capabilities is that the boundaries that once defined where bvr ended and wvr began are being dramatically altered. Increasingly, where opposing aircraft each get a missile off of the rail, the probability of a ‘mutual kill’ is frighteningly high.


Which will make a loyal wingman more important than ever.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 20 Oct 2020, 02:42
by boogieman
madrat wrote:
quicksilver wrote:We’ve had this discussion around here before; the consequence of these new/emerging capabilities is that the boundaries that once defined where bvr ended and wvr began are being dramatically altered. Increasingly, where opposing aircraft each get a missile off of the rail, the probability of a ‘mutual kill’ is frighteningly high.


Which will make a loyal wingman more important than ever.

Agree. By using F35 as the hunter and LW as the hounds, the latter could establish a dispersed forward ISR screen to protect against the possibility of "bumping" into another LO jet at a dangerously short-range, while feeding targeting data back to the shooters. This then gets more interesting as you put munitions on the LW themselves.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 20 Oct 2020, 09:14
by hornetfinn
spazsinbad wrote:
milosh wrote:
alloycowboy wrote:I think you missed the point. If you get into a dog fight in a stealth fighter you did something drastically wrong. Also you don't want to get anywhere near the stall speed in a dogfight as that would make you a sitting duck.

Against non stealth yes but if both sides have decent number of stealth fighters then you will surely have stealth dogfights.

WOTIF my stealth is better than your stealth?


I think there might be a remote chance that some day F-35 will fight another F-35. In that case I see the following:

AWACS/AEW and ground/sea surveillance radars will be almost irrelevant for the fight. They would still be useful for other things, but they will have serious trouble detecting and tracking enemy aircraft until they are far too close for comfort. AEW aircraft would likely be pulled back for their protection for this reason. So neither side would have good overall SA before and during the fight.

F-35s would detect and track each other at about similar distances and that's likely rather short compared to detecting/tracking 4th gen fighters with F-35. As soon as you detect another F-35, you know it also has detected you and both are now very potential targets not only for each other but to other F-35s and other units (including SAMs) in the battlespace.

I think it will usually not be 1-on-1 fight, but rather many-vs-many fight with both sides fighting extremely co-operatively. Of course that is true even with 4th gen jets, but with F-35 there will be things like doing sensor fusion using all the sensors in all the friendly F-35s totally automatically, including ID and ROE stuff. So any F-35 could shoot at any target seen by any other F-35 even if it didn't see the target itself. So even after shooting all own weapons, F-35 will remain highly dangerous as it will still augment the overall SA and give targeting data to others.

I don't think anybody would start turning dogfights or anything like that in this hypothethical F-35 vs F-35 scenario. It would just make you an easier target for all those other enemy F-35s. I think if two opposing F-35s pass each other, the best option would be to get the hell out before turning and let the other friendly F-35s do their job.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2020, 02:49
by XanderCrews
milosh wrote:
Against non stealth yes but if both sides have decent number of stealth fighters then you will surely have stealth dogfights.


Not really. it just adds another layer to the "sensor vs stealth" debate. Just think, in 10 years no one on any airplane forums are going to debate who the better "dogfighter" is but who has the better radar, and skin.

It will be super exciting

We've already had "stealth dogfights" on multiple occasions in training, since we've had 5th generation stealth fighters in service for 15 years now.

it doesn't end the way you hope. :?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2020, 15:29
by zero-one
hornetfinn wrote:I don't think anybody would start turning dogfights or anything like that in this hypothethical F-35 vs F-35 scenario. It would just make you an easier target for all those other enemy F-35s. I think if two opposing F-35s pass each other, the best option would be to get the hell out before turning and let the other friendly F-35s do their job.


Not sure why we are generally dismissive of the possibility of "dogfights"here . Listening to actual pilots like C.W Leonine and Gonky who is usually a guest on the show, they talk about how easy it is to get into a merge even in today's network centric battlespace,

There was an episode where they suggested what they would want on a next gen fighter and both agreed that it should still have excellent traditional fighter performance qualities. Because all it would take is for someone to sneak passed all the sensors and boom, you're in the merge.

I was personally surprised with that statement, I did not think it was still possible to "sneak up" unless you're in a 5th gen yourself. but those are their words. Gonky later said that one thing you'll learn is that something always goes wrong, the moment my Radar doesn't work is when I need it the most.

Now of course we have the famous words of Ret. Lt Col David "Chip" Burke, who said that the least impressive trait of the F-22 is it's speed and agility and that if you're still thinking dogdights then you're missing the point.

However that is in sharp contrast to another F-22 pilot's statement when asked in the Fighter pilot podcast, Ret.Col Terry Scott's answer when asked what was the most impressive asset of the F-22, was the flight controls and the ability of the aircraft to move and maneuver, later on Col Scott mentioned that the Raptors have merged with Su-35's in Syria and performed "very well"

2 F-22 pilots, both retired, contrasting views. All I'm saying is, we shouldn't be so dismissive of the merge as if it's almost an impossible occurance.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2020, 20:43
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:2 F-22 pilots, both retired, contrasting views. All I'm saying is, we shouldn't be so dismissive of the merge as if it's almost an impossible occurance.


infantry:

Image

Infantry:

Image

Infantry:

Image

The "merge" will exist, however it will be unrecognizable compared to the past.

The entire point of maneuver is for the fighter to bring weapons to bear. if the weapons can be brought to bear from any aspect, there is no longer a need to maneuver.


Image

air to air kills at all, regardless of WVR/BVR are damn rare anymore. So we are talking about a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. (BVR, then WVR, then actual maneuver "dogfight") the bottom line is that modern aerial warfare is essentially "winner take all" in order for sustained air to air operations to occur the enemy must have a way to replenish and generate sorties either due to:

distance (korea)
political interference/boundaries/ROE. (Vietnam)
or both (korea)

compared to whats happened the last few decades-- air supremacy. Whatever is flying is shot down, ground defense nullified or destroyed, airfields destroyed, and the enemy air force is gone. We basically learned to annihalite enemy air power and the means to resist. I don't think regular US troops have been attacked by an air opponent since harassing attacks in Korea, the news for those facing the US is not so cheery

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2020, 20:58
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:The "merge" will exist, however it will be unrecognizable compared to the past.


Thank you, this was my whole point, I'm not saying it will be like World war 2 or even Vietnam.....errrr wait scratch that,
my whole argument is that we shouldn't be dismissive, so as much as it won't likely be like Vietnam, I'm also not going to completely dismiss that.

I'm happy you made infantry as your point of reference, with today's modern handheld weapons you can theoretically kill the enemy from a kilometre away, operating word is "can" because even if it's possible, the enemey won't let that happen they adjust and CQB or close quarter battles is still a very common occurrence specially in an urban setting.

So yes theoretically you can eliminate the merge, but just like the infantry, the enemy will do its best to adapt and force it because that their best chance against 5th gens.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2020, 23:55
by boogieman
zero-one wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:The "merge" will exist, however it will be unrecognizable compared to the past.


Thank you, this was my whole point, I'm not saying it will be like World war 2 or even Vietnam.....errrr wait scratch that,
my whole argument is that we shouldn't be dismissive, so as much as it won't likely be like Vietnam, I'm also not going to completely dismiss that.

I'm happy you made infantry as your point of reference, with today's modern handheld weapons you can theoretically kill the enemy from a kilometre away, operating word is "can" because even if it's possible, the enemey won't let that happen they adjust and CQB or close quarter battles is still a very common occurrence specially in an urban setting.

So yes theoretically you can eliminate the merge, but just like the infantry, the enemy will do its best to adapt and force it because that their best chance against 5th gens.

I don't think anyone is arguing that the merge won't ever occur, just that the way you approach it will have to be different. If your opponent can take a within-NEZ-shot at you over his shoulder after the merge, the "default" response of immediately turning back into him may not be appropriate. I would posit that at that point you are maneuvering in relation to the incoming missile(s) (defensive) rather than the bandit (offensive) at that point. If you are capable of taking within-NEZ shots at him over your own shoulder as well, then that only strengthens the imperative to keep the nose pointed away from the bandit and create more distance to escape the WEZ. The alternative to this might be to try and stick as close to the bandit as possible to stay inside his missile Rmin, but, aside from being very difficult (next to impossible if he decides to blow through), this would also potentially stifle your own offensive options and - perhaps most importantly - leave you extremely exposed to being killed by third parties.

The only caveat to this would be the need to deploy countermeasures like ALE-70 (towed decoy) which may mandate a beaming maneuver with respect to the incoming missile(s). No matter which way you cut it, the entire complexion of the WVR fight is turned on its head because two of traditional dogfighting's underpinning assumptions (forward firing aircraft and a "safe" 6 o'clock control zone) no longer apply.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 00:37
by quicksilver
“I don't think anyone is arguing that the merge won't ever occur, just that the way you approach it will have to be different. If your opponent can take a within-NEZ-shot at you over his shoulder after the merge, the "default" response of immediately turning back into him may not be appropriate. I would posit that at that point you are maneuvering in relation to the incoming missile(s) (defensive) rather than the bandit (offensive) at that point. If you are capable of taking within-NEZ shots at him over your own shoulder as well, then that only strengthens the imperative to keep the nose pointed away from the bandit and create more distance to escape the WEZ. The alternative to this might be to try and stick as close to the bandit as possible to stay inside his missile Rmin, but, aside from being very difficult (next to impossible if he decides to blow through), this would also potentially stifle your own offensive options and - perhaps most importantly - leave you extremely exposed to being killed by third parties.

The only caveat to this would be the need to deploy countermeasures like ALE-70 (towed decoy) which may mandate a beaming maneuver with respect to the incoming missile(s). No matter which way you cut it, the entire complexion of the WVR fight is turned on its head because two of traditional dogfighting's underpinning assumptions (forward firing aircraft and a "safe" 6 o'clock control zone) no longer apply.“

x2

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 00:42
by quicksilver
“...in order for sustained air to air operations to occur the enemy must have a way to replenish and generate sorties...”

x2! Airfields would go down very early...

“The "merge" will exist, however it will be unrecognizable compared to the past.

The entire point of maneuver is for the fighter to bring weapons to bear. if the weapons can be brought to bear from any aspect, there is no longer a need to maneuver.”

This too...(as b’man has pointed out as well).

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 03:53
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:as your point of reference, with today's modern handheld weapons you can theoretically kill the enemy from a kilometre away, operating word is "can" because even if it's possible, the enemey won't let that happen they adjust and CQB or close quarter battles is still a very common occurrence specially in an urban setting.


I'm going to drop the infantry metaphor because its just going to great a giant side show distraction.

[
So yes theoretically you can eliminate the merge, but just like the infantry, the enemy will do its best to adapt and force it because that their best chance against 5th gens.


How is their "best chance"? I challenge that entire assumption. US pilots have lost like 2 aircraft since 1973 in dogfights, and I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the alleged downing of Scott Speicher to even make it that. Theres absolutely no evidence in my mind that WVR is any less deadly. The F-35 and F-22 can maneuver, the pilots are trained, I have no idea why we think "AHA! if I can get within visual of those dastardly Americans they don't stand a chance! I've got that F-22 in a dogfight! this will end well!!"

recent history says they all just die anyway.

My issue is this. Theres a chance we are 100 percent wrong on all of this. the future is Battle of Britian 2.0.

but assuming its not, I really have no idea how much of my force and training I'm supposed to be throwing into the very slim chance an F-35 finds itself all alone in a vertical scissors with a Flanker. I really don't get it. are we supposed to be perfect? even in Korea where the K/D was 12:1 in favor, the bad guys still got 1. We've lost more F-15s to training accidents than we have air combat. we lose pilots and airplanes via attrition year after but the idea that an F-35 might get into a dogfight and not win, is supposed to stop the presses. I really don't care.

If im in a war with a near peer, yeah I'm gonna lose some aircraft. This idea that I'll lose 100 fighters to various kinds of peacetime oopsies over the years, but losing just one in a dogfight is "the end" is ridiculous. This is like a combination lock. They have to get 4 numbers correct to get 1 kill. Thats not sustainable. if it ends up being 10 kills for every 1 I lose, even if the 1 I lose is in the most humiliating dogfight embarrassment ever, I'll take it. 10 kills is more than 1. They'll run out long before I do.

I'm a crappy boxer. Luckily for me combat isn't usually determined by boxing. I'll bet on me with a rifle every time though. So I'm willing to win 100 gunfights if it means I lose a boxing match here and there.

I simply refuse to believe in a "quadruple" failure. especially when one of those links is well trained, not stupid, far more hours in cockpit, pilot. Most nations don't have our level of pilot expertise so even if everything went to hell technologically, I'm betting the pilots will make it work and when the day until we can refine and reform. Thats the way granddaddy did it against the Zeros. The US just has an immense and unbelievable pilot program. Thats what all the dogfight practice is about in the first place. We aren't even neglecting it.

BVR= just kill them
WVR= Just kill them
Swirling dogfight= just kill them

The end isn't in doubt. we may lose some yes. We lose some now even in peace. they're basically a footnote. People don't talk about Scott Speicher when we talk about 1991.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 04:06
by spazsinbad
'zero-one' said earlier: "...So yes theoretically you can eliminate the merge... the enemy will do its best to adapt and force it [the merge?] because that [is] their best chance against 5th gens." As has been explained now more times than I can count & explained by the knowledgeable people in their replies here again 'the merge' as you call it ain't gonna happen. Whatever THEORETICAL scenario you can devise relies upon the enemy aircraft being itself invisible to an F-35.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 13:30
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:How is their "best chance"? I challenge that entire assumption.


I'm saying this as opposed to the alternative. If you are a Russian or Chinese or North Korean pilot, what do you think the chances are that you can kill an F-35 from BVR, 5% maybe 6, from WVR you may have a 15% chance of success, it's still extremely low but if I'm the Chinese, I will focus our entire training syllabus and strategy on how I can get to WVR where my chances are slightly higher.


I agree with all your other points, I'm just saying lets not be too dismissive, another thing that we seem to be dismissive of is the "hit the breaks and he'll fly right by" maneuver , I'm guilty of this as well, if you're thinking cobra, you're probably an airshow fanboy. Little did I know that maneuver was actually used in combat

Here Capt. Randy Cunigham recounts how his maneuver was what inspired the producers in Top-Gun to put it in the film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WkjdZHkOIY&t=17s

Yes its very rare, but it happens, thats my whole point, I'm not saying anyone is wrong, I'm just trying to keep it in check.
when someone says, this "can't" happen, it can be a very dangerous assumption, thats all this is.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 13:32
by zero-one
spazsinbad wrote: As has been explained now more times than I can count & explained by the knowledgeable people in their replies here again 'the merge' as you call it ain't gonna happen.


Except it already did,
Look back at Ret. Col Terry Scott's account on how F-22s have "merged" with Su-35's over Syria and "performed very well"

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 13:45
by zero-one
quicksilver wrote:The entire point of maneuver is for the fighter to bring weapons to bear. if the weapons can be brought to bear from any aspect, there is no longer a need to maneuver.”

At reduced Pks of course

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sTsjQ_ud8E&t=1646s

Tom Morganfeld wrote:The question is, "how important is maneuverability to a modern fighter" I don't know of a fighter where maneuverability wasn't important. now if you get decent weaponry then it takes away the need for maneuverability TO A CERTAIN EXTENT but if its an air to air fighter it has to be able to turn and point it's nose


Being an F-35 test pilot, knowing more about the aircraft than most non military personnel, I think this holds a lot of water

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 15:32
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote: it can be a very dangerous assumption, thats all this is.


but its not a "dangerous assumption" in the first place.


This is based on the idea that somehow the US is at a disadvantage WVR. its not. Theres no evidence of that.

F-22- hyper manueverable
F-35A is roughly equal to an F-16 and outperforms most contemporaries close in.

we teach WVR, we practice WVR, we have things like red flag and top gun.

What more do you want? Thats my point. how many more hours and training am i supposed to dedicate to training a skill we already have even more?

Your entire argument hinges on the idea that:

A. The merge is inevitable
B. we will inevitably be at a disadvantage when it does.

Theres no evidence of that. theres no reason to think that our gear or our personnel are somehow weak sauce the second the enemy visually acquires us. this is Vietnam baggage thats being retreaded.

most fighter pilots around the world are not picked based on merit. its politics and familial connections. That Saudi Prince in an F-15 is not there because he is just a monster behind the stick. China has the same problem. Connected pilots fly Flankers. the scraps get the old junk. the US for the most part still works on merit.

You've accepted a false arguement and are no debating on the assumptions there in. even the "haha mauneverability still matters!!" good thing the F-35 and F-22 can maneuver then, correct? what more do you want? the F-35A can ONLY pull 9.9G? should it be 12 or something? am I doubling Red Flags? opening more advanced pilot schools like NSAWC? making more aggressor/adversary units? how much time and effort and money am i supposed to pour into a situation we can already handle well enough?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 15:46
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:This is based on the idea that somehow the US is at a disadvantage WVR. its not. Theres no evidence of that.
A. The merge is inevitable
B. we will inevitably be at a disadvantage when it does.



All of these are your words not mine. I have never once said that the US is at a disadvantage in WVR nor did I say it was inevitable. (What I said is that it CAN happen)

What I'm saying is, forum people, like you and me seem to dismiss the possibility far more often than actual pilots. Actual pilots talk about it like it can really happen, but over at f-16.net, a lot of folks (not you) seem to think that the merge is some sort of fantasy that can't happen.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 15:58
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:I'm saying this as opposed to the alternative. If you are a Russian or Chinese or North Korean pilot, what do you think the chances are that you can kill an F-35 from BVR, 5% maybe 6, from WVR you may have a 15% chance of success, it's still extremely low but if I'm the Chinese, I will focus our entire training syllabus and strategy on how I can get to WVR where my chances are slightly higher.


I really hope they are that stupid.

All of these are your words not mine. I have never once said that the US is at a disadvantage in WVR nor did I say it was inevitable. (What I said is that it CAN happen)


I said it could happen and would be completely different than what you are thinking.


What I'm saying is, forum people, like you and me seem to dismiss the possibility far more often than actual pilots. Actual pilots talk about it like it can really happen, but over at f-16.net, a lot of folks (not you) seem to think that the merge is some sort of fantasy that can't happen.


I love a good appeal to authority as much as the next strosstruppen, but I'm saying its essentially irrelevant. and odds are it will not happen unless its an actual pitched big war against China or Russia or some other power that actually has numbers and some juice. and numbers that matter. Even if Russia decided to go to war over syria, they have a handful of aircraft on known airfields. air dominance in minutes.

Youre fretting over things we already do.

but muh guns. F-35 and F-22 have guns

but muh dogfight. the pilots are trained on dogfighting

but muh meaneuervability. both aircraft are maneuverable.

but muh experience. the pilots are trained in some of the most challenging environments imaginable

but muh vietnam. 50 years ago, and we've killed 60 since, with zero loses save for one assumed loss n 1991.

but muh unknown unknowns. good luck with that, there are always unknown unknowns, the whole idea is no one can predict such things.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 16:09
by quicksilver
We’ve been over all of these things with you before zero.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 16:33
by zero-one
quicksilver wrote:We’ve been over all of these things with you before zero.

yes, you have had this conversation with me before, but you know what, you will have it again, its a cycle

1. someone(not you) says its impossible
2. I say it's just unlikely but very possible
3. People seem to largely agree

then a few months later someone says it's impossible again. so yes, we've had this before and I won't be surprised if we have this again

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 16:40
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:Youre fretting over things we already do.

but muh guns. F-35 and F-22 have guns

but muh dogfight. the pilots are trained on dogfighting

but muh meaneuervability. both aircraft are maneuverable.

but muh experience. the pilots are trained in some of the most challenging environments imaginable

but muh vietnam. 50 years ago, and we've killed 60 since, with zero loses save for one assumed loss n 1991.

but muh unknown unknowns. .


Again all your words not mine. The USAF knows what they are doing, they know it's a serious possibility, my problem is with some Forum people, (not you) those that say,

"As has been explained now more times than I can count & explained by the knowledgeable people in their replies here again 'the merge' as you call it ain't gonna happen"

Thats my problem, where does this idea come from? the USAF definitely doesn't think this way, I can quote multiple pilots who said that the merge is still possible, so where are these forum people getting these ideas?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 17:10
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:Again all your words not mine. The USAF knows what they are doing,


Thats my point. they can do WVR if its needed anyway which means you're just upset at this point that they refuse to recognize your arguement on an internet forum.



Thats my problem, where does this idea come from? the USAF definitely doesn't think this way, I can quote multiple pilots who said that the merge is still possible, so where are these forum people getting these ideas?


There are things called "professional disagreements." Wherein, despite our best brain-washing efforts, some people in uniform have different opinions on different subjects. We keep trying to beat the humanity out of them, but despite our best efforts the individual opinions remain. Nonetheless, Beatings will continue.

There are people in the air force who think pilots are completely obsolete, or very nearly so. Pilots disagree.

which "air force says" am i to believe?

There are people in the navy who believe the twilight of the CVN is at hand. there are others who think its only getting better. Which "Navy says" am i to believe?

FFS look no further than the F-35 itself. opinion throughout the services is not uniform. You think every pilot out there approves of the F-35? every official? every general or flag?


its very simple:

1. the "merge" is going to become ever more rare, for various reasons
2. when and if the merge does occur, it will be nearly unrecognizable compared to the past
3. the result will be the same.

so why the f**k should i care? especially when i feel we are as prepared as we've ever been for such a slim possibility? (could our time not be better elsewhere?)

We still teach "combatives' and "hand to hand" and whatever theyre calling them these days as always, but at one point its time to focus on what one is more likely to see. (hell combative are now mainly taught to foster aggression, not even to impart practical fighting skills. its far more mental than anything else. I can only yell and stab a tire so many times)

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 18:17
by spazsinbad
zero-one wrote:
spazsinbad wrote: As has been explained now more times than I can count & explained by the knowledgeable people in their replies here again 'the merge' as you call it ain't gonna happen.

Except it already did,
Look back at Ret. Col Terry Scott's account on how F-22s have "merged" with Su-35's over Syria and "performed very well"

How about providing a link so others may gauge how an F-22 & an Su-35 merged somehow (on the F-35 sub forum no less).

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 19:30
by zero-one
spazsinbad wrote:How about providing a link so others may gauge how an F-22 & an Su-35 merged somehow (on the F-35 sub forum no less).

Others? Everyone else seems to have heard about it already, but for reference, heres the interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AguVV7SH9eY&t=2298s

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 20:13
by sprstdlyscottsmn
Yeah, the F-22 merged with the Su-35 because those two countries are not in a shooting war. The F-22 shows up and pressures the Su-35 out of the area.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 20:51
by spazsinbad
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Yeah, the F-22 merged with the Su-35 because those two countries are not in a shooting war. The F-22 shows up and pressures the Su-35 out of the area.

:applause: Thanks for the precis 'sprstdlyscottsmn'. :crazypilot: I'm wondering how that video is relevant to the topic at hand. <sigh>

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 21:20
by zero-one
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Yeah, the F-22 merged with the Su-35 because those two countries are not in a shooting war. The F-22 shows up and pressures the Su-35 out of the area.


Well how many non shooting war merges actually ended up with a kill.
Gulf of Sidra, the Turkish shoot down of Russian Su-24s, Pakistani shoot down of a Mig-21, Look I've made my point, all I'm saying is it's possible. Thats all this is, its possible and I think you would agree that its not impossible.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 21:41
by zero-one
spazsinbad wrote: :applause: Thanks for the precis 'sprstdlyscottsmn'. :crazypilot: I'm wondering how that video is relevant to the topic at hand. <sigh>


weren't you the one who asked for links so that "others can gauge how F-22 and Su-35 merged somehow" :lmao:

and now you're wondering how the video is relevant? come on Spaz

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 22 Oct 2020, 23:16
by usafr
The irony here is that zero-one "merged" with Spaz, got on HIS tail and just shot him down! ;-)

This is the "Test pilot admits F35 cant [sic] dogfight" thread.

We know how credible that claim was once the facts were revealed.

How about repeating that test today and making it just as public.

I think that test HAS already been repeated, F-35A 3F vs F-16C and the result was quite different.

That's why the totally fair minded media has moved on; "nothing to see there."

Ya think an F-22 and F-35 have not yet tangled with each other in WVR dogfight test?

Why would the USAF NOT do that? They have and completely control both assets.

They do not have to make the result public but their pilot's should know exactly the strengths and weakness of each others aircraft so as to complement each other in real combat situations.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Oct 2020, 00:29
by boogieman
zero-one wrote:
quicksilver wrote:The entire point of maneuver is for the fighter to bring weapons to bear. if the weapons can be brought to bear from any aspect, there is no longer a need to maneuver.”

At reduced Pks of course

In WVR? Not necessarily. AFAIK any reduction in pK experienced by AAMs fired at targets behind the wing line is primarily driven by kinematics (ie. range/speed penalty). Not sure that this would be an issue in a WVR fight for a TVC-equipped AIM260 or possibly even SACM.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Oct 2020, 01:05
by spazsinbad
OMG a 96 minute video about the F-22? As mentioned this is 'the F-35 can't dogfight' thread so I ain't watching the video and have relied on the reliable aforementioned viewer. Still waiting to hear how the video is relevant. Quotes at certain times in the video would be useful but how relevant will they be given the precis given. Fighter pilot crew room dogfights are fun.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Oct 2020, 06:26
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:At reduced Pks of course



it doesn't matter. the simple fact is that the environment is simply too lethal. If someone wants to bet their life that the reduced PK is worth it, they're welcome to it. Thats the crux of the matter. One of the key points of being a pilot is to not push a bad hand. fold and live to play another day. betting the house is not recommended.

No idea how many other aircraft are in the area to back shot those playing in WVR
no idea how many HOBS weapons are in play
No idea how many cooperative engagement assets are within range

a lone victim is no longer "Alone" these days. an "unarmed" airplane is no longer helpless.

all of this has to be accounted for. the reduced PK is meaningless. a "nearly dead" wild animal must still be treated with great respect. One can't really ignore missile threats, and thats the biggest lesson in all this.

many people have written much smarter things in this forum and elsewhere about BVR missile for example. even if they're not that great, unreliable, etc the enemy must still respect their potential. Even if its a "bluff" no one wants to get within the envelope of an F-15.

in the world of the blind, the one eyed man is king. a "bad" HOBS shot is still a HOBS shot. can't ignore it

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Oct 2020, 07:59
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:it doesn't matter. the simple fact is that the environment is simply too lethal.


True, but it won't necessarily stop it from happening. I think the recent Mig-21 shoot down was an example of a HOBS on HOBS encounter.

We have a long thread about it but I tend to gravitate towards the Pakistani claim simply because all 4 R-73s were recovered from the Mig-21 in contrast to the Indian claim that their Mig-21 shot down an F-16 before being shot down by another aircraft.

Also, usually when war breaks out, intelligence agencies from around the world have a better idea of what actually happened and this will affect military procurements.

Judging by the demand and interest for the F-16, its still high, even India itseld is interested in their own version on the otherhand, interest towards R-73 or upgrade for Mig-21 BIS didn't seem to pick up. If it was able to punch above it's weight and kill an F-16, Im sure a lot of Mig-21 operators out there will be interested in a BISON upgrade.

Just my 2 cents

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Oct 2020, 11:29
by hornetfinn
I don't really get what we are arguing here. F-35 definitely has excellent "dogfighting" capabilities and is likely a very tough opponent for anybody, including even F-22. Let's see:

1. It has excellent maneuverability with excellent STR and ITR along with extremely good high-AoA capability. According to Jon Beesley (taken from https://www.livescience.com/3032-fighte ... fleet.html)

What Beesley expects will surprise future F-35 pilots is the jets' superb low speed handling characteristics and post-stall 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 comes very close to the Raptor", Beesley said.


2. It has excellent subsonic (and transonic) acceleration. According to Jon Beesley (same source)

"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.


3. It has DAS which is totally unique capability to F-35 with the totally spherical IRST. So it will be able to passively track almost anything within WVR ranges. Hotter objects can be detected and tracked further than what the pilot could possibly see them.

4. F-35 has the most advanced helmet mounted display system which gives all the necessary data through virtual HUD in all situations and ranges to the pilot without need to look at HUD.

5. F-35 has the most advanced networked sensor fusion will constantly keep track of every known target with full ID. This is important as there have been cases where positive ID has proven very difficult even within very close ranges preventing or delaying missile shot opportunities. Especially important in "the merge" where keeping track of everybody would be very difficult for the pilots and long range sensors (like AWACS or other surveillance radars).

Even more impressive is that F-35 has all these while being able to carry powerful air to ground load and similar amount of fuel which other fighters would need 3 big EFTs. So other fighters are subsonic and have significantly lowered turn rates, AoA limits and acceleration. F-35 is still Mach 1.6, 50 degree AoA and almost similar turn rates as "clean" F-35.

So it's clear that F-35 can "dogfight" very well and was designed to do so. But I do think that F-35 pilots will do their best to avoid that kind of situation and fight "unfairly". Having better stealth and SA than anything else helps immensely in this. But it can do that if needed and do it very well.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Oct 2020, 14:09
by squirrelshoes
zero-one wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:How about providing a link so others may gauge how an F-22 & an Su-35 merged somehow (on the F-35 sub forum no less).

Others? Everyone else seems to have heard about it already, but for reference, heres the interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AguVV7SH9eY&t=2298s

In other news, TU-95s have also managed to merge with F-22s.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 23 Oct 2020, 15:15
by mixelflick
Honestly, it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone LM designed the F-35 to dogfight, or perform well air to air... however you want to say it. By the time its design was finalized, LM of course knew most nations wouldn't have an F-22 (or F-22- like big brother) to fight its air to air battles for it.

The plan all along was for NATO (and others) to buy it, and only it in a number of cases. LM never predicated or assumed it would be part of a "high-low mix", so it truly needed to be air to everything.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 26 Oct 2020, 21:55
by ricnunes
DITTO hornetfinn and mixelflick :thumb:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 03:31
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:it doesn't matter. the simple fact is that the environment is simply too lethal.


True, but it won't necessarily stop it from happening.


of course it stops it from happening. Pilots will be told to shoot and scoot, avoid visual combat, avoid environments that increase risk. it doesn't mean that poo won't happen and WVR will rarely occur. my point is that it will occur so rarely as to be rendered a footnote. what would have once upon a time have been 10 merges in 100 engagements will drastically shrink, because again we the pilots will be told in no uncertain terms to avoid it.

thats the whole point-- don't fly your F-35 like its an F-16 in 1982.

We didn't give you a sub MOA rifle with an 800 Meter optic and thousands of hours of training so you could do a bayonet charge. etc etc.

I think the recent Mig-21 shoot down was an example of a HOBS on HOBS encounter.


those 5th gen Mig-21s are really something.

Here is the F-35 dogfight controversy in a nutshell, with a personal anecdote thrown in.


The F-35 meets or exceeds 4th generation kinematics, all the way back in 2011 it pulled 9.9G and flew to mach 1.66. its perfectly capable of dogfighting with anything out there, unless one wants to try and say that F-16s or F-15s or F-18s are suddenly "bad" at dogfighting. The F-35B greatly exceeds the harrier, and the harrier actually has an amazing array of kills. more than the F-18 in fact.

basically the F-35 was next up after the kinematic awe of the F-22, which didn't help as it embarrasses everything before it. next, F-35 was promoted as so lethal as to not need to dogfight. this was then taken by people straight back to "muh Vietnam" where some hard lessons were to be learned and the dogfight had been prematurely declared obsolete. There was some merit in this-- however those lessons has been deeply absorbed and we have fought multiple air actions in the DECADES since vietnam, they have been nearly universally brutal toward the enemy and completely one sided. The vast majority of American kills since Vietnam have been BVR.

people basically took it and twisted it. if you can see your opponents cards a lot of pokers' strategy can be ignored. this is like people complaining that you aren't playing by those no unneeded strategies as one doesn't have to "bluff" or other nonsense when they know already. "oh your P-51 is so great compared to my sopwith camel? you don't even have wing rigging!" technology advances, and in airpower especially at an astonishing rate.

so what happened was the F-35 not really needing to dogfight became that it couldn't dogfight

one of the best Marines I ever met was a Sgt. who was a mortarman by trade, but was also a blackbelt in Akido and MCMAP (back when that meant something) now a mortar can kill things kilometers away, but I don't feel like we should have to constantly specify that although my Sgt could and should be able to rain steel on badguys miles away, and that was his primary specialty that he could also kill people hand to hand. he was perfectly capable of such, and should his mortar fail he would go to a rifle or even a handgun, and bayonet before finally going hand to hand, I think we would be remiss to believe that a mortarman having to resort to such things didn't mean a lot had gone horribly wrong in the first place, and of course by engaging in hand to hand combat, whomever was relying on his fire support was now without it. in other words, we avoid that because its not the most effective use of our resources, even though we could indeed do it the dumber, less efficient, more risky way.

And this is whats frustrating about the modern internet age. People generally speak by giving pertinent information and leaving other stuff out for the purpose of brevity. but now, whatever is left out is now twisted into an absence or lack of something:

"Generally speaking, most women are shorter than men"

then you wait to hear about someone's female cousin who is 6 foot 3, and again since we didn't specify the exception enough, so people declare it a falsehood, when that is not what is said at all. we should have to specify every tall female in the world.

we really shouldn't have to read out the f-35s resume and capabilities down to the tenth of G every time we talk about it, or else that means somehow by not mentioning dogfighting, it somehow can't do it but thats what it has been relegated to by a handful of either geneuine amatures, or in some cases, those with an actual monetary stake in driving such a falsehood in order to hopefully sell their wares to an unsuspecting public.

it really is ridiculous like a child that needs constant reassurances from mommy :roll:

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 04:10
by spazsinbad
squirrelshoes wrote:
zero-one wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:How about providing a link so others may gauge how an F-22 & an Su-35 merged somehow (on the F-35 sub forum no less).

Others? Everyone else seems to have heard about it already, but for reference, heres the interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AguVV7SH9eY&t=2298s

In other news, TU-95s have also managed to merge with F-22s.

Just in by ancient e-mail [did they MERGE?]: "VF-114 F-14 Tomcat escorting a Tu-95" and nice reply ZanderCrue...
And a merge for all seasons TOMcat V skyHAWK.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 14:13
by zero-one
XanderCrews wrote:of course it stops it from happening. Pilots will be told to shoot and scoot, avoid visual combat, avoid environments that increase risk. it doesn't mean that poo won't happen and WVR will rarely occur.


I'm not disputing that, it will be rare for sure, how rare, I don't know, I don't think 10 out of a hundred specially against high end targets is unrealistic, and those are not far from Lockheed's own estimates, I can no longer find the link but they said that they expect ~60% of future air combat to be BVR, ~30% to be TVR (trans visual range) and 7% to be WVR.

XanderCrews wrote:thats the whole point-- don't fly your F-35 like its an F-16 in 1982.

yes but you also won't always be going against Mig-23s like it was 1982

XanderCrews wrote:Here is the F-35 dogfight controversy in a nutshell, with a personal anecdote thrown in.

yes it can, in fact, I would put an F-35's kinematics above an F-16C and F/A-18C because it combines the best characteristics of both

XanderCrews wrote:those 5th gen Mig-21s are really something.

but didn't you guys say, WVR will be too lethal and should be avoided at all cost,
I guess now it only applies if you're in a 5th gen

I've heard this story before, ACEVAL\AIMVAL said all aspect heaters will result in mutual kill scenarios, which required a fire and forget missile for A-a engagements
Desert storm came and went, we've had plenty of WVR scenarios during and after that, involving all aspect, most of the time without Aim-120s on our side, but this much vaunted mutual kill scenario can't seem to happen, :shrug:

spazsinbad wrote:In other news, TU-95s have also managed to merge with F-22s.


yes they have, and Su-35's and F-4s for that matter. But will we always expect these routine merges to be uneventful because they are not in a "shooting war"

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 15:04
by quicksilver
This latest round of ‘he said, she said’ seems to be predicated on the claim by zero that some unnamed someone said a ‘merge’ was ‘impossible.’

Tell us zero — who, exactly, said it was, (quote) impossible?

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 15:39
by spazsinbad
NOPE it was SQUIRRELYclogman wot rote it
squirrelshoes wrote:
zero-one wrote:

Others? Everyone else seems to have heard about it already, but for reference, heres the interview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AguVV7SH9eY&t=2298s

In other news, TU-95s have also managed to merge with F-22s.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 16:27
by quicksilver
Huh??

Read my question again.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 16:34
by zero-one
quicksilver wrote:Tell us zero — who, exactly, said it was, (quote) impossible?

There are a few of these going around. just back read a few pages.

spazsinbad wrote: As has been explained now more times than I can count & explained by the knowledgeable people in their replies here again 'the merge' as you call it ain't gonna happen.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 19:47
by quicksilver
zero-one wrote:
quicksilver wrote:Tell us zero — who, exactly, said it was, (quote) impossible?

There are a few of these going around. just back read a few pages.

spazsinbad wrote: As has been explained now more times than I can count & explained by the knowledgeable people in their replies here again 'the merge' as you call it ain't gonna happen.


Got it. Thx.

Seems the proverbial horse should be long ago dead, and now buried.

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 27 Oct 2020, 20:29
by XanderCrews
zero-one wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
thats the whole point-- don't fly your F-35 like its an F-16 in 1982.

yes but you also won't always be going against Mig-23s like it was 1982


so... we are saying the same thing in a different way?


but didn't you guys say, WVR will be too lethal and should be avoided at all cost,
I guess now it only applies if you're in a 5th gen


I think one should avoid the dangers of drinking and driving as well, but damned if people don't still do it.

boy you got me there!

haha xander! You said don't do dumb $hit, but then this person still did dumb $hit!

check mate alright.

without being mean to certain countries, (or any competitive thing really) there are some things you can get away with vs lower competition. The things you can get away with against a noob, may get you crushed against someone with some experience. think of any competition. you can pull silly tricks with lower competitors that would get you wrecked if you tried them against someone with experience or skill.

people do really stupid stuff sometimes as a matter of course. The US military with its nearly religious belief in "safety" has far less risk tolerance than many other militaries out there as well.

I've heard this story before, ACEVAL\AIMVAL said all aspect heaters will result in mutual kill scenarios, which required a fire and forget missile for A-a engagements
Desert storm came and went, we've had plenty of WVR scenarios during and after that, involving all aspect, most of the time without Aim-120s on our side, but this much vaunted mutual kill scenario can't seem to happen, :shrug:


share the numbers, I'm curious

elaborate on this

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2020, 00:34
by spazsinbad
Another MERGE via E-mail: "VF-151 F-4B Phantom II intercepts a TU-94D early 1970s"

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2020, 01:06
by spazsinbad
Hear's hoping the ALLIES with F-35s take notice in a GENERAL sense - seems RAAF does this already - avoid DOGfights! :roll:
Wilsbach to Allies: Learn from USAF’s Mistakes, Fly Your F-35 Like an F-35
27 Oct 2020 John A. Tirpak

"Pacific Air Forces commander Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach has some advice for users of the F-35 in his region: Don’t use it like the aircraft you’re used to, but take advantage of its full potential.

Speaking at an AFA Mitchell Institute virtual event Oct. 27, Wilsbach said the U.S. Air Force operated the F-22 like the F-15C for “about five years,” failing to fully exploit its fifth-generation stealth and sensor fusion capabilities. “It took us a while to learn” what the jet could really do, he said, and now, “the tactics are completely different.” He advises the F-35 partners to use the aircraft “like an F-35,” and not like some of the high-performance fourth-generation aircraft they have been operating.

“Take advantage of the lessons learned that we’ve had,” he said. “Skip right to that … and cycle through those lessons learned that much faster. Take full advantage of the platform.”

The advice “resonates with those operators,” he said. The U.S. has F-35 exchange pilots with Australia, Japan, & Korea, and “they all learn to fly it at Luke” Air Force Base, Ariz., so the foundation exists for a good partnership on the F-35 and other interoperable systems, he asserted....

...Stealth will also continue to be essential “to get inside of [an adversary’s] network and sensors undetected, so that they don’t know that they’re there, or when they do figure it out, it’s too late.”... [THEN THERE IS TALK OF INTERCEPTS]

[MERGE ME UP SCOTTIE!]

Source: https://www.airforcemag.com/wilsbach-to ... e-an-f-35/

Re: Test pilot admits the F35 cant dogfight

Unread postPosted: 15 Nov 2020, 05:03
by boogieman
Confirmation of what we all already knew: