F-35A vs B vs C

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

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2140
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 05:56

Actually, you might recall that the USG changed the spec for sustained turn for each of the variants back in 2013 (iirc). Assuming the same flight conditions, the sust turn perf of the C is slightly higher.
Online

marsavian

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 510
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 11:29

wrightwing wrote:
zero-one wrote:
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Let's summarize with "Anything that involves needing to make a lot of lift, the C does better. Anything that involves high speed/acceleration the A does better.


Okay, so if I remember the physics of turning correctly. It involves both. But if I'm correct, at the same G. the A will have a lower turn rate but a higher air speed, while the C will be at slower speed with a higher turn rate.
I'm not sure how the C would maintain the better sustained G since it has more drag and weight, but apparently it does.
I also think it will climb better except if its a straight to vertical power climb.

The C doesn't have a better STR than the A. It has a better ITR/turn radius. The A has the better rate.


A would only have a better STR is if in the particular scenario at sea level it could sustain 8-9g (never been claimed though) otherwise C has the documented better rate. A has the better ITR above corner velocity but yes below that C would take over that metric too. In summary A turns better above corner velocity (~ Mach 0.7) because of its 9g capability but below that C's greater wing lift dominates. At 19kft F-35 E-M diagram ...

Image
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2140
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 13:56

For all the attention that "technology" and the quantifiables get, much of flying (particularly in BFM) is still "organic." Note the pilot in this article talking about "feel."

https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-vs ... ack-2017-4
Online

lbk000

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 04 May 2017, 16:19

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 16:22

Here we are backsliding yet again into WW2 dogfight pursuit mindset...
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2140
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 16:43

Nonsense. We’re just talking about flying.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2433
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 17:16

A big part of the "C is the best variant" is based on Billy Flynn's testimony. And as someone who's flown all 3 variants, I suppose he would know! But the C is the version most lagging, and Mr. Flynn works for LM. That too, needs to be factored in IMO.

We need to acknowledge the C will have the worst thrust-to-weight ratios of the 3: 0.75 at full internal fuel and 0.91 at 50%. That, as a consequence of its beefier construction and carrying a whopping 19,000lbs of internal fuel. And that's before any external stores are carried...

Don't get me wrong: T/W ratio isn't everything. But it is important, and by accepting this performance the Navy has bet even bigger than the USAF, Marines and our allies that stealth, its sensors, weapons and situational awareness will carry the day.

Let's hope so...
Online

marsavian

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 510
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 21:00

Conversely the F-35C will be able to turn very competitively with anyone if forced to. Remember its base core mission will be fleet defense and out of all the F-35s it needs to have the best dogfighting skills if attackers just have to be destroyed to protect the carrier group.
Online

lbk000

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 04 May 2017, 16:19

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 21:35

marsavian wrote:it needs to have the best dogfighting skills if attackers just have to be destroyed to protect the carrier group.

This... is not how FAD works. This isn't how FAD worked before stealth, and it's even further from reality after stealth. Right off the bat, I don't think you guys understand how time consuming dogfighting is. Positioning takes time. Rating takes even more time, because while you're rating the enemy is also rating around. And then again, while you're waiting playing rate wars with the Su-27, those massed Kitchens or god forbid those new "hypersonic" AShMs are speeding towards your carrier. Oops!

Su-27s don't kill carriers. J-11s don't kill carriers. What kills carriers? Tu-22s. Tu-160s. For arguments sake we'll even consider H-6Ks and Su-34s. These are all big aircraft shooting big missiles. They don't dogfight, and if you can get a shot off on them either they or their mission is over with. So how do you get that shot off on them? Gee golly whiz it just so happens you have these great VLO aircraft that allow you to save time and save lives by slipping past people who want to tie you up and waste your time.

You're literally cooking up contrivances here because you don't like the idea that the C model has a few numbers lower than other numbers. To justify your argument you'd have to ignoring the existence of the BVRAAM among entire swaths of the air combat complex, hell, you have to ignore the actual objective here to make yourself sound good. Sure the F-35C has better STR performance. This is a completely "cool story bro" sort of deal. Nobody gives a rat's a$$ about that anymore, there are bigger forces in play that determine the score at the end of the day.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7473
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 22:08

Will Top Gun 2 just be more of the same? Hope not...
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3601
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 22:10

Top Gun already wasn't realistic in regards to the mission of the F-14. It was fun to watch BECAUSE of all the super close range "dogfighting". Nobody wants to watch Maverick look at his scope, push a button, and wait for the blip to stop blipping.
"Spurts"

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

marsavian

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 510
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 22:16

Sure ideally take them out of range, BVR, stealthily but what if you don't have enough effective BVR missiles to do the job there and then and they are still heading for the fleet/target ? They have to be fought in the trenches like F-14s did over Libya and Iran and that was the ultimate BVR interceptor of the 20th century. F-35C is perfectly equipped for the job of standing and fighting if it hasn't already speared you at range. These comments were primarily in response to mixelflick who was worried about its thrust/weight ratio.
Online

lbk000

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 04 May 2017, 16:19

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 22:33

popcorn wrote:Will Top Gun 2 just be more of the same? Hope not...

Wouldn't get my hopes up, the reality of even 4th generation air combat is already too alien to appeal to the general public.

There are already enough enthusiasts who have trouble grasping what an RWR is ("if I turn it off will I also disappear from enemy radar?").
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1705
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 22:37

marsavian wrote:... but what if you don't have enough effective BVR missiles to do the job there and then and they are still heading for the fleet/target ?


You borrow some slammers from another aircraft and provide targeting (5th gen fighting), or you whistle up some SM-6's from the nearest Arleigh Burks (OR LHDs or whoever happens to have them handy), and provide targeting.

Dogfighting a Cee Monster should be the last thought entering the pilot's head. (But I think it would more than hold its own.)
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, add dollop of F-117 & gob of F-22, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well, then bake. Whaddya get? An F-35.
Online

lbk000

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 170
  • Joined: 04 May 2017, 16:19

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 22:50

marsavian wrote:Sure ideally take them out of range, BVR, stealthily but what if you don't have enough effective BVR missiles to do the job there and then and they are still heading for the fleet/target ? They have to be fought in the trenches like F-14s did over Libya and Iran and that was the ultimate BVR interceptor of the 20th century.

No
Libya and real FAD are completely different scenarios and can't even be remotely compared. In a real FAD scenario all hands are on dick. Behind your flight is another flight and behind him, another flight still, not to mention as Steve said, you have all other antiair assets to tap into. When you've done your thing, you sit back and you let the next group have their turn.
In fact, you are a liability if you decide to close with the enemy because now the guys behind you can't freefire their missiles for fear of accidentally hitting you instead.

Please, get your head out of the video game mentality. Stop casting your perspective as some sort of heroic mission. It's a team effort.


Oh yeah good thing the F-35C doesn't carry a gun so you don't even need to think about playing red baron.
Last edited by lbk000 on 08 Nov 2018, 23:04, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

vilters

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 843
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post08 Nov 2018, 23:03

All you need is a clown that puts : "Visual Identification Required before engaging" in the ROE's.

It will take a long time before "Stealth Tacktics" creeps up the command ladder.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests