F-15 driver says the Eagle can beat the F-35A in dogfight

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

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6583
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 08:34

This is an expert.........

BIOGRAPHICAL SUMMARY: Lieutenant Colonel Billie Flynn, BEng, MSME, MS, MBA – Royal Canadian Air Force (Ret’d)

Lieutenant Colonel Billie Flynn is a Senior Fellow of New Westminster College. He earned a BEng in Mechanical Engineering from the Royal Military College of Canada, MS in Mechanical Engineering from California State University at Fresno, MS in Aviation Systems from the University of Tennessee and an MBA from the University of Ottawa. Billie Flynn is also a graduate of the Royal Military College of Canada.

Lieutenant Colonel Flynn retired as a Lieutenant Colonel from the Royal Canadian Air Force, presently serves as an Experimental Test Pilot at Lockheed Martin, and is the 39th test pilot to have flown the F-35 Lightning II. He is past President of the 2,400 member Society of Experimental Test Pilots...................


http://newwestminstercollege.ca/9-2/

BF.jpg
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 08:45

Justin Bronk, a combat aircraft expert

He's an expert like Sprey's a designer :doh:
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 10:10

One jet that in US hands, in actual combat, achieves:

110 v 0


i.e. it doesn't even HAVE a kill exchange RATIO.

Is being ROUTINELY beaten by a new jet within PRESENTLY ALMOST IRRELEVANT A2A ACM---by a new jet which was not even intended to replace the ACM-optimised first jet.

What more needs to be said?

These 'kills' mean nothing much compared to 110 v 0.

Obviously in real A2A conflicts the F-35 will also probably never exhibit a real kill exchange RATIO.

So it seems a bit pointless to read more into this stuff.

----

I bet the F-15A got bested more than a few times, at ACM, that it was optimised for, while it was IOC.

Didn't mean anything then, or in actual battle, because ACM was a no-show for the F-15's entire USAF operational combat history.

:doh: :wtf:
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3066
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 11:28

Well, nothing new...

http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArch ... ssors.aspx

So effective were the Aggressors, even against vastly superior aircraft like the F-15, that for a time in the 1970s Congress dallied with the idea of buying vast numbers of inexpensive F-5Es rather than pricey F-15s. Air Force leaders patiently explained that the F-15s lost early engagements with the Aggressors because Eagle pilots were not yet proficient in DACT.

After training with the Aggressors and in Red Flag, the F-15 pilots became unbeatable, however. The F-15, in fact, was designed around lessons learned from the Red Baron study: It was a machine designed exclusively to achieve air superiority, with excellent maneuverability, speed, acceleration, radar range, and visibility for the pilot. In US and foreign service, the F-15 has racked up more than 100 dogfight victories over nearly 40 years, without any losses.


That article was pretty interesting and describes pretty well the problem fighting against 5th gen jets:

“It’s just kind of scary a little bit to fly around in the dark with an invisible airplane that’s around you somewhere,” he said. “Those guys are very good pilots, their situational awareness is very high and they do a good job of keeping us in the loop of where they are when they’re on the same team as us.”


That would be really nerve wrecking for the enemy in real shooting war.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 13:29

Yeah, thanks hf, what I suspected, agree about the article too.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 13:45

The other thing people need to get clear on, is that the F-35's extraordinary agilty and transonic acceleration (not speed) ISN'T THERE FOR ACM---at all.

It is there to ENABLE passive stealth combat tactics, and rapid signature plus aspect management and positioning.

It's the F-35 that should have been called 'Raptorsaurus', because that's what it will do.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2505
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 14:09

hornetfinn wrote:That would be really nerve wrecking for the enemy in real shooting war.


There was an article written, that has been quoted here abouts somewhere, of an F/A-18 pilot describing the very real psychological effects of trying to combat the F-35 (or perhaps it was the F-22) in exercises, let alone combat.

ZeroOne, my apologies if you thought I was accusing you of trolling. I think my exasperation (?) was more intended for the world in general, "aviation" journalists in particular.

My comment about the F-16 was to highlight the fact that an airshow "clean" Viper may very well best an F-35 in turn rate, and then only by a very small amount. But start hanging stuff on a Viper as it goes to war, and its performance starts to suffer greatly. This point -- that 4th gen aircraft all suffer (serious) performance degradation in their go-to-war configuration -- seems to be overlooked time and time again, certainly by the "aviation press."

The F-35 pilot with whom I corresponded said this:
Also important to remember that all those numbers you see for the F-16/15/18 for EM performance, and the flight demos at air shows, are generally in an "air show config.". Our performance at an airshow, along with the F-22, is in a combat config. Hang pylons (after punching off tanks), a couple missiles, targeting pods (can't punch those off) off a viper or hornet and it looks a lot different.


I asked Col Berke some questions via Twitter about F-35 performance:
steve2267:
"@davidrberke Col, can u say what the F-35's rate band was? Am guessing 300-370 IAS. In this band, is it true that you would rate like a Viper? Thx."

David Berke:
"The rate band is a little higher than that. Performance is similar to F-16 in rate and F-18 in radius."

steve2267:
"Is it a little below the Viper's rate band? A 2009 story mentioned config 240-3 cornered @ 370IAS @ 15K. As an aero guy, I am amazed at what LM managed to pull off."

David Berke:
"Above"


Upon further reflection, the pithy quotes by former Bug / Rhino drivers about the F-35 being a Hornet with a turbo, or a Hornet with four engines do seem to be really telling. I think I overlooked what they were saying. There have been many quotes and stories about just show dangerous the F/A-18 is in a fight. A Viper pilot has to bring his "A" game to defeat the Bug, or the nose pointing ability of the Bug will get him. Pilots of other aircraft like the Mig 29, Typhoon, and Rafale have all commented about how dangerous the F/A-18 is and how you have to be very careful when flying against it. The knock against the Bug is that it bleeds energy like a stuck pig, and doesn't have the power to get it back quickly. Now take a Bug and magically put four engines on it, or add a "turbo" (my mind wanders back to the Battlestar Galactica Viper of the '80s and the "turbo" button) to it, and I think Billie Flynn's (much poo-pooed) comment, about overlaying E-M diagrams and how the F-35 bests them all, comes into focus.

The article that started this thread was really poorly written. On its surface, it seems to say "the F-35 is no great shakes -- it is still bested by the F-15." But you have to really read between the lines to see what McGehee was saying. Just tossing some numbers out for illustration, if the F-15 is winning contests against the F-35 once in eight goes... that would be an 8:1 "kill ratio" in favor of the F-35, which is really quite astounding, but also meets McGehee's comment about "I mean, sometimes."
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

monkeypilot

Banned

  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2017, 09:35

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 14:57

Corsair1963 wrote:
zero-one wrote:Talk about Twisting words around

http://www.businessinsider.sg/f-35-vs-f ... ?r=US&IR=T
Justin Bronk, a combat aircraft expert at the Royal United Services Institute, previously told Business Insider.

The reason why, according to Bronk and other experts on the F-35, is that the F-35 just isn’t a dogfighter. The F-35’s stealth design put heavy demands on the shape of the aircraft, which restricted it in some dimensions. As a result, it’s not the most dynamic jet the US could have possibly built, but it doesn’t have to be.

Instead, the F-35 relies on stealth. F-35s, employed correctly in battle, would score most of their kills with long range missiles fired from beyond visual range.


Really, Combat Aircraft Expert???

This is Justin Bronk
https://rusi.org/people/bronk

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/justin-bronk-395a5661

jb1-web.jpg


Justin Bonk....
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 958
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 19:45

element1loop wrote:The other thing people need to get clear on, is that the F-35's extraordinary agilty and transonic acceleration (not speed) ISN'T THERE FOR ACM---at all.

It is there to ENABLE passive stealth combat tactics, and rapid signature plus aspect management and positioning.

It's the F-35 that should have been called 'Raptorsaurus', because that's what it will do.

Sigh.

After so many years, on this forum, why on earth are you guys still discussing this? Why don't you just :doh: and move on?

The superiority of F-35 over 4. gen and 4.5 gen platforms is so clear that to be honest, I don't understand why you even bother. Espescially on this forum it is very much "preaching to the choir".
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 451
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post29 Mar 2018, 22:46

element1loop wrote:Didn't mean anything then, or in actual battle, because ACM was a no-show for the F-15's entire USAF operational combat history.

:doh: :wtf:


Thats exactly the point. Even in the gulf war 1991, where the F-15 shoot down over 30 Iraki Fighters, was nearly no "classic" low speed Dogfight. 2/3 of the kills where done with BVR missiles. And there was no AMRAAM and AESA Radar.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post30 Mar 2018, 01:50

@ swiss & loke

And for sure there will be another ACM article and thread next week. :bang: :doh: :mrgreen:
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

usnvo

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 197
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2015, 18:51

Unread post30 Mar 2018, 17:00

zero-one wrote:Just so we're clear USNVO and Steve2267

So no, I am not sugesting for one second that the F-35 is a duck. In fact I have posted many times before that the best way to defend the F-35 against trolls is to give em all the evidence in the world (and there are plenty) that the F-35 is a very high performance platform, Before you go on stealth and the fact that it does not need to maneuver.......

.....All Im saying is, that in training....with the right circumstances, right ROEs, a lot of luck maybe, Mr. McGehee was able to beat some F-35s SOMETIMES. That's actually a testament to the F-35, that one of the best ACM platforms ever made has been reduced to something that can beat a fighter bomber only sometimes

Thats not a knock on the F-35, Any plane can loose even the Raptor.
So please don't treat me like a troll.


Please do not think I was treating your comments as trollish or in having any anti-F-35 bias. Far from it. The bias you have is the opposite, you clearly have issues with someone rightfully pointing out that a F-35 is not invulnerable somehow. Or at least you are so hyper-sensitive to that point that you can't objectionably evaluate what was said.

Capt. McGehee was very clear, or at least as clear as a fighter pilot can be given their pride in their own aircraft, that the F-35 was a very difficult opponent that won pretty often. He was given a hypothetical question that in many ways was unfair and he responded in a very humble, reasoned way. Very unfighterpilotish. From his comments, he is not even talking about himself so he probably was not one of the pilots who was sometimes able to get the offensive position on a F-35. You may have viewed the article as a hit piece, and it may have been somewhat biased, but Capt. McGehee's comments were in no way besmirching the F-35 or the pilots that fly it. It is clear he holds the aircraft in high regard.

My point was mearly to be objective in your evaluation of anything about the F-35 as you had misinterpreted the good Captains comments based on the general tone of the rest of the article.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3906
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post30 Mar 2018, 17:05

element1loop wrote:
Didn't mean anything then, or in actual battle, because ACM was a no-show for the F-15's entire USAF operational combat history.

That may be true of the USAF, but not Israel. Not saying your point isn't valid, but when looked at in the context of all F-15 air to air combat... it's performed brilliantly at both. Also, the 1/3 of Desert Storm kills that were ACM involved Mig-25 but more significantly, Mig-29's. So yes, the F-15 is that good.

And apparently, the F-35 is dispatching it with regularity...
Offline

firebase99

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 83
  • Joined: 03 May 2017, 21:47

Unread post01 Apr 2018, 05:13

Little late to the party. I think I read what Im about to write now on this forum somewhere. Ok, F-35 in ACM, got it. Ive seen it turn and burn too. Pretty amazing. HOWEVER, with all this 5Gen tech deployed in a hotzone, suppose there are some SU's in the area, they probably know there are 5th gen here so ANY little beep, ANY little blip, ANY little return they get theyre going to think its a Raptor/Lightning. They'll be chasing ghosts and already psychologically beaten. Best case scenario for them is RUN because falling, flaming wreckage has never reversed on anyone.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1406
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2015, 05:35
  • Location: Australia

Unread post01 Apr 2018, 05:50

mixelflick wrote:element1loop wrote:
Didn't mean anything then, or in actual battle, because ACM was a no-show for the F-15's entire USAF operational combat history.

That may be true of the USAF, but not Israel. Not saying your point isn't valid, but when looked at in the context of all F-15 air to air combat... it's performed brilliantly at both. Also, the 1/3 of Desert Storm kills that were ACM involved Mig-25 but more significantly, Mig-29's. So yes, the F-15 is that good.

And apparently, the F-35 is dispatching it with regularity...


Yeah, cases of bubonic plague persist. ;-)

I actually editted the "USAF" part in after I posted it. :mrgreen:
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests