F-35A vs B vs C

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

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21745
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 09:56

No - I do not have the answer - hence my question. Now my question: why use those phrases if they cannot be backed up?
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1733
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 10:05

Okay, well I thought maybe somebody had the answer.
I just thought that maybe we're paying too much attention in that 8 second transonic acceleration figure as well as the sustained G change when all they said was they "expressed intention" to change it. They may have not really gone through with it.
Offline

marsavian

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 565
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 10:41

It was changed.
Offline

zero-one

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1733
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 10:43

marsavian wrote:It was changed.

Now we're getting somewhere.
Mind if you could post the link to that :D
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21745
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 14:15

My understandings of KPPs Key Performance Parameters are contained in the SAR F-35 Selected Acquisition Report 2019.

BUT "Classified Performance information is provided in the classified annex to this submission" - good luck with that.

Latest SAR 2019: download/file.php?id=27020 (0.7Mb) A two page PDF of KPPs as seen in the GIF below is attached below. CLICK the graphic and then CLICK AGAIN to zoom in to read it, there are some nice changes such as the new STO length.

Someone could search for this "Requirements Reference Operational Requirements Document (ORD) Change 3 dated August 19, 2008 as modified by Joint Requirements Oversight Council Memorandum 040-12 dated March 16, 2012"
Attachments
KPPs FY2019 PB F-35 SAR.pdf
(80.47 KiB) Downloaded 56 times
KPPs FY2019 PB F-35 SAR TIF.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2474
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 15:04

Let's just all focus on getting a more powerful motor.

Easiest way to end these performance issues :)
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5667
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 21:42

steve2267 wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
2000 lb bomb was yet another navy requirement. I've taken this "extreme" position before, (but why not once more in thread that compares all 3 varaints??) the F-35C NOT the F-35B as so many claim is the problem child. Its the most different the Navy desire to have 2K bombs lead to a weight increase that then had to be tamped down with the SWAT effort which lead to huge delays. Irony being what is is the service that was the biggest pain in the butt with the F-35 program is also the service that has the Super Hornet and seems very happy with them (that will change of course)


Ironic then... that without that (Navy) 2000lb bomb requirement, the fuselage might possibly be more streamlined / narrower, enough that LM might have been able to give the Air Force their 8 seconds back on the transonic acceleration KPP. Also, with less weight (e.g. less structure etc), LM might have been able to meet the Air Force & USMC KPP for sustained turn rate. Would be an interesting question for someone on the F-16 design team if LM could have met those KPPs (transonic accel & sustained turn gee) were it not for the 2000lb bomb KPP. If so, that would be an interesting demonstration of the cascading effect requirements can have on performance metrics.



even more "ironic" when NG rolls out the Block III weapons pod for Super Hornet and its largest single bomb is 1000 pounds :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:
Choose Crews
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7835
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 21:54

IIRC the "weapon pod" is NOT part of the F-18 Block 3 plan, only the CFTs.

Btw, the acceleration and turning numbers for the F-35 are NOT KPPs (there are only ~9) but are instead KPIs (there are over 400).
Last edited by SpudmanWP on 14 Nov 2018, 23:14, edited 1 time in total.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21745
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -1

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 22:07

Where do we find this list of KPIs? Key Performance Indicators? Or something else? That was my point about citing KPPs.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5667
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 22:14

SpudmanWP wrote:IIRC the "weapon pod" is NOT part of the F-18 Block 3 plan, only the CFTs.

Btw, the acceleration and turning numbers for the F-35 are NOT KPPs (there are only 6) but are instead KPIs (there are over 400).



Well the whole thing was a mockup. Its about the least efficient way one can imagine to carry weapons...
Choose Crews
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2161
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 23:04

XanderCrews wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:IIRC the "weapon pod" is NOT part of the F-18 Block 3 plan, only the CFTs.

Btw, the acceleration and turning numbers for the F-35 are NOT KPPs (there are only 6) but are instead KPIs (there are over 400).



Well the whole thing was a mockup. Its about the least efficient way one can imagine to carry weapons...


If one looks at the pics of the pod mounted on the jet, it appears it would be hard to load wps in the pod w the pod on the jet. Very poor pod-ground clearance.

To my knowledge, the KP-whatevers are not public info.
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 7835
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post14 Nov 2018, 23:14

The KPIs and KPPs were all laid out in the JSF ORD.. Good luck getting that.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2919
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post16 Nov 2018, 05:29

zero-one wrote:


They still might. Will Block 4 have any significant weight gains? The Thrust increase will be 10% if I remember correctly, and if the weight stays the same or maybe even drops, we could meet the original performance KPPs.

10% on the low end, and possibly 20%.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1152
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post16 Nov 2018, 07:08

Edited for posting fiction.
Previous

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests