F-35 got 0 losses in dogfights against F-15E Red Air

tacf-x · by **tacf-x** » 24 Jun 2016, 03:27

spazsinbad wrote:Quote from:
F-35A High Angle of Attack Operational Maneuvers
14 January 2015 LM Test Pilot

"...Overall, the most noticeable characteristic of the F-35A in a visual engagement was its lack of energy maneuverability. The test pilot had 2,000 hours of flight time in the F-15E, experience in the F-16 Blks 30/40/42/50, exposure to flying the F-18F in high AoA, and has fought dissimilar BFM engagements with each in addition to F-15C. The EM of the F-35A is substantially inferior to the F-15E with PW-220s due to a smaller wing, similar weight, and ~15,000lbs less in afterburner thrust...."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/site-files/avia ... euvers.pdf (0.3Mb)

Ah, so the old test with the AF-2 that shows precisely nothing about what an IOC F-35A is capable of once it has all of the flight software restrictions removed. Got it.

Anyway, this exercise is an outstanding find. It should further hasten the day when the anti-F-35 critics will all have to eat metric tons of crow.

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 24 Jun 2016, 04:00

Crow with a side dsh of humble pie...

mav95 · by **mav95** » 24 Jun 2016, 06:24

I find it pretty interesting that there were 0 losses of F-35's in a WVR deal fight, wonder if it was because of the HMC or its maneuverability or a mix of the 2? Anyone have anymore info ? Would love to hear it won because of a mix of tech and aircraft agility, I.e Gun kills on the F-15

jessmo111 · by **jessmo111** » 24 Jun 2016, 06:30

popcorn wrote:Crow with a side dsh of humble pie...

Crow you say?

hornetfinn · by **hornetfinn** » 27 Jun 2016, 12:57

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
count_to_10 wrote:Question: what is the significance of it being F-15E aggressors?
How much less capable at anti-air is the F-15E than the F-15C?

BVR? Not much.

It might also be much more capable opponent depending on what systems are installed. F-15E is likely very formibadle opponent if equipped with AN/APG-82 AESA radar and Sniper ATP pod. It might well be that the testing was done against F-15E because of these sensors would really test F-35 capabilities against any 4th gen adversary. AFAIK, 391st fighter squadron F-15Es are mostly upgraded with AN/APG-82s, although somebody please correct me if that's wrong info. Given that AN/APG-82 has very likely the highest performance of any 4th gen fighter radar and Sniper ATP is far more powerful IR sensor than any 4th gen IRST system, the result is astonishing success for IOC F-35.

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 27 Jun 2016, 13:11

hornetfinn wrote:
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
count_to_10 wrote:Question: what is the significance of it being F-15E aggressors?
How much less capable at anti-air is the F-15E than the F-15C?

BVR? Not much.

It might also be much more capable opponent depending on what systems are installed. F-15E is likely very formibadle opponent if equipped with AN/APG-82 AESA radar and Sniper ATP pod. It might well be that the testing was done against F-15E because of these sensors would really test F-35 capabilities against any 4th gen adversary. AFAIK, 391st fighter squadron F-15Es are mostly upgraded with AN/APG-82s, although somebody please correct me if that's wrong info. Given that AN/APG-82 has very likely the highest performance of any 4th gen fighter radar and Sniper ATP is far more powerful IR sensor than any 4th gen IRST system, the result is astonishing success for IOC F-35.

Didn't know they'd started giving F-15Es AESAs. I knew there were plans to but they always seemed to be the perpetually put off type like reengining the B-52. But you know who else is at Mountain Home?

"Radar. Singapore became the 1st country after the USA to buy AN/APG-63v3 AESA radars. The new Active electronically Scanned Array technology offers a 2-3x boost in range vs. the older APG-70 on most USAF and foreign Strike Eagles, true simultaneous air and surface capabilities, agile-beam capabilities that make it hard to backtrack the radar source, expandability thanks to new software modes that could include high-bandwidth communications and electronic warfare, 20x better reliability than the APG-70, and low maintenance costs.

The biggest difference between the APG-63v3, and the APG-82v1 AESA derivative that will retrofit American F-15Es, is that the APG-63v3 uses Line Replaceable Unit (LRU) “black boxes”. The entire LRU is swapped out if something goes wrong, and faults must be diagnosed and fixed at maintenance depots. "

hornetfinn · by **hornetfinn** » 27 Jun 2016, 13:38

sferrin wrote:Didn't know they'd started giving F-15Es AESAs. I knew there were plans to but they always seemed to be the perpetually put off type like reengining the B-52. But you know who else is at Mountain Home?

I got the information from here:

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/486296/f-15e-takes-first-flight-with-new-radar-system.aspx

The RMP replaces the F-15E's more than 20-year-old legacy APG-70 mechanically scanned radar with an active electronically-scanned array, or AESA, system designated as the APG-82(V)1.

The modification process is managed by Boeing representatives and takes two to three months to complete for each aircraft. The tentative plan is to complete RMP for 47 aircraft from the 389th FS and 391st Fighter Squadron by 2017.

arian · by **arian** » 27 Jun 2016, 22:16

APG-82s started entering service in 2014 on F-15Es. It's basically a totally different radar from APG-63(V)3 since the back-end is from the Super Hornet's APG-79.

Here's the funding for the two systems out to 2024

rotosequence · by **rotosequence** » 28 Jun 2016, 01:59

F-15...Es? I thought the F-15E wasn't properly equipped for the air superiority mission.

tacf-x · by **tacf-x** » 28 Jun 2016, 02:07

The F-15E has the cleared capability to fire the AMRAAM and AIM-9X just like the F-15C. It also has the appropriate radar modes for Air to Air combat. It's not strictly limited to Air to Ground.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 28 Jun 2016, 02:14

Cenciotti says "some analysts" (and it seems as noted by others that ALERT5 has that 'status'?) said EIGHT to NIL etc....

F-15E Strike Eagles unable to shoot down the F-35s in 8 dogfights during simulated deployment
27 Jun 2016 David Cenciotti

"“0 losses in 8 dogfights against F-15E Red Air”...

...The fourth column [of the graphic] shows something interesting: during the exercise, the F-35s were challenged by some F-15Es and suffered no losses.

Even though the graphic does not say whether the F-35s did shoot back at the F-15Es some analysts (noticing also the “pew pew pew” in the chart….) have suggested the JSFs achieved stunning 8:0 kill rate against the Strike Eagle.

However, the “zero losses” may simply mean that the F-35s were able to complete their assigned strikes without being shot down by the aggressors of the Red Air: considered that the F-15Es were probably equipped with the AN/APG-82 AESA radar and the Sniper ATP (Advanced Targeting Pod), the fact that the Strike Eagles performing DCA (Defensive Counter Air) were not able to “find” and/or “engage” the almost-IOC F-35s can be considered a huge achievement for the pricey, troubled 5th generation multirole combat plane.

Actually, this is not the first time the F-35 proves itself able to fly unscathed through a fighter-defended area: not a single Lightning II was shot down during Green Flag 15-08, the first major exercise conducted, more or less one year ago, on the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, during which the F-35 flew as main CAS (Close Air Support) provider.

At that time, several analysts claimed the participation of two test aircraft in the exercise was just a PR stunt, since the aircraft was still quite far from achieving a combat readiness required to really support the troops at war.

Let’s see what happens this time…"

Source: https://theaviationist.com/2016/06/27/f ... eployment/

mrigdon · by **mrigdon** » 28 Jun 2016, 02:17

rotosequence wrote:F-15...Es? I thought the F-15E wasn't properly equipped for the air superiority mission.

They were flying as aggressors. The Air Force and Navy have used all kinds of planes as aggressors that weren't 'properly equipped' for air superiority in that role (like the F-5).

My guess is that F-15Es, being based at Mountain Home, were convenient. There's no longer a designated Aggressor squadron that flies the F-15 and the F-16 doesn't model a Flanker derivative as well, so the F-15Es at the base got the job.

madrat · by **madrat** » 28 Jun 2016, 02:31

Can AI guided F-15C's take down F-35A?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... tedly.html

The AI 'Top Gun' that can beat the military's best: Pilots hail 'aggresive and dynamic' software after losing to it repeatedly

mrigdon · by **mrigdon** » 28 Jun 2016, 02:54

madrat wrote:Can AI guided F-15C's take down F-35A?

Can they see the F-35A? If not, then no.

At some point, AI was going to catch up with the best human pilots. And it only has to catch up. If the AI is programmed with the best tactical maneuver for every situation, then it just has to keep flying until the human either gets tired or loses focus. Then the AI gets the win.

Put two AI systems against each other, though, and the battle is a stalemate. Will AI make air combat pointless?

blindpilot · by **blindpilot** » 28 Jun 2016, 02:59

madrat wrote:Can AI guided F-15C's take down F-35A?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... tedly.html

The AI 'Top Gun' that can beat the military's best: Pilots hail 'aggresive and dynamic' software after losing to it repeatedly

[tongue in cheek] Absolutely not. The pilot just throws a secret hidden switch next to the "light/heavy" ejection seat switch, and the F-35 goes into "ALIS you fly it" mode. [may not be a joke in ten years ]

BP