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

[mk82]

Captain MacGehee (USAF) is spot on with his underlying statement that it is ultimately the “person”/pilot in the machine who will make the most difference in any engagement. On another note, a lot of people are forgetting that the F15 (especially the C/D variant) is still an apex predator in the WVR BFM/ACM environment. That is how the good/how sound the underlying F15 platform is! A highly experienced Sierra Hotel F15C pilot would thrash a not so stellar pilot flying any flavor of the Flanker in WVR BFM/ACM all day.....everyday! Don’t forget that F15Cs nowadays have JHMCS and AIM 9X too. As many other posters on this thread have pointed out, the fact that F15C pilots (generally Sierra Hotel F15C Pilots from the 44th and 67th fighter squadron (USAF)) could only sometimes defeat the F35A in mock dogfighting is a testament to the ever improving skills of the pilots from the 34th fighter squadron (USAF) and the incredible capabilities of the F-35.

[SpudmanWP]

Not only could they only "sometimes" win, half of the F-35As were flown by pilots fresh out of B-School, ie this was their first combat jet (they did not transfer from the F-16, 15, etc).

[zero-one]

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.

3rd law of motion
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

For years, critics have been calling the F-35 a turkey, can't turn, can't climb, can't run. A terrible compromised airframe that even a Mig-21 can beat.

In turn supporters tend to do the exact opposite, it's as good as a Typhoon, Hornet with 4 engines, just a tad bit less than a Raptor. I'm guilty of this. But I also think we were far more spot on than the critics.

Truth is, the KPP for the F-35's kinematics were only to match that of the F-16 and F/A-18 and it has, it's even slightly superior in some aspects albeit also slightly inferior in others. But it's still a match which is more than good enough for any guns only engagement against any fighter even with a highly experienced pilot.

Do I have problems with Capt'n McGehee's statement? absolutely not, an F-15 can beat anything, even Raptors. He said it was difficult and he said they can only do it sometimes. And we're only talking about dogfights. Much of the F-35's killing will be done BVR.

But this just goes to show that even if you survive the BVR onslaught, the chances of winning a dogfight against an F-35 is still pretty slim.

[mk82]

Not only could they only "sometimes" win, half of the F-35As were flown by pilots fresh out of B-School, ie this was their first combat jet (they did not transfer from the F-16, 15, etc).

Indeed SpudmanWP. That makes the F-35 even more impressive. I suspect that F15C Pilots from the 44th Fighter Squadron and 67th Fighter Squadron were surprised initially (and unpleasantly) when they engaged F35A pilots from the 34th Fighter Squadron in mock dogfights.

[monkeypilot]

I don't know why there is all that fuss about an interview. F-35 is not invincible, and F-15 isn't lame either. So what is surprising here if sometimes the F15 sores a "win"?

[SpudmanWP]

why there is all that fuss

Becasue all that the ABJ crowd howls is "can't climb, can't turn, can't run", "everything from the JPO is lies", and "frontline pilots will tell us the truth".

Well, welcome to the truth.

[usnvo]

Do I have problems with Capt'n McGehee's statement? absolutely not, an F-15 can beat anything, even Raptors. He said it was difficult and he said they can only do it sometimes. And we're only talking about dogfights. Much of the F-35's killing will be done BVR.

But this just goes to show that even if you survive the BVR onslaught, the chances of winning a dogfight against an F-35 is still pretty slim.

I agree with you and I believe Capt McGehee probably does as well. From the article he was clearly impressed with the F-35 and also exhibited the kind of nervousness other pilots have identified when fighting F-22s and F-35s. My point was merely that you don't want to reflexively assume someone is bad mouthing the F-35. Reading the article, the Captain's comments made me think of the line in Spaceballs where John Candy say "Not Bad... For a Girl"

[steve2267]

Truth is, the KPP for the F-35's kinematics were only to match that of the F-16 and F/A-18 and it has, it's even slightly superior in some aspects albeit also slightly inferior in others. But it's still a match which is more than good enough for any guns only engagement against any fighter even with a highly experienced pilot.

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but it is this specific point that I think many (or most (of us?)) overlook or don't fully appreciate. The "theme" seems to be the F-35 has combined the kinematics of the F-16 and the F/18-18... that's neat... but so what? -- I mean, neither the F-16 nor the F/A-18 are exactly cutting edge anymore.... Maybe my opinion that many (of us?) seem somewhat dismissive of this achievement (or do not fully appreciate what it means) is off base, but I do think that the aviation / aerospace press, and especially the detractors, feel this way.

What am I trying to say? Well, the F-16C Blk 50 is still a respected 4th gen tactical aircraft. Below 10K or 15K feet, it supposedly will give a Typhoon a run for its money. The knock against the F-16 is that it's high alpha performance is not there. The F/A-18 C/D/E/F is a greatly respected 4th gen tactical aircraft, that if one is not careful, does not bring one's A-game, will kill you in a heartbeat. The knock against the Bug/Rhino being that it bleeds energy badly, and does not regain lost energy quickly.

What if you could give a Blk 50 Viper the high-alpha / small radius capabilities of the (S)Hornet? That would be a fearsome machine, no? Give a Typhoon / Rafale / SU-27/30/35 a real run for its money, eh?

What if you could sprinkle pixie dust on an (S)Hornet and magically give it the acceleration of a Blk 50 Viper? With just two engines, the (S)Hornet was a real competitor to the Typhie, Rafale, SU-whatever... now magically give it four engines, or a Battlestar Galactica turbo... and it may very well eat those planes for breakfast, lunch, and dinner (with Gripens for snacks).

Oh yeah, toss in a for-real disappear switch, a helmet mounted sight to die for (or kill with), seamless avionics that enable the pilot to really concentrate on fighting the jet, rather than having to expend brain cells on sensor management, or flying... and you've got one killer of an air-to-air machine.

So, for me, this achievement of combining the kinematic qualities of both the Viper and the Hornet is nothing short of astonishing, and really explains why the Lightning is such a beast.

OK, I'll shut up now.

[spazsinbad]

You forgot the 'over the shoulder boulder thrower' able to look via vHUD in the 6 shooting missiles aspect. FARRRKKKKK!!!!

[gta4]

Am I the only one who noticed this?

"So can the F-15 beat the F-35 in dogfights?

“I mean, sometimes,” McGehee said"

-----Sometimes...

Even I am not a native speaker, I know A-10 can beat a highly maneuverable fighter jet sometimes.

[zero-one]

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but it is this specific point that I think many (or most (of us?)) overlook or don't fully appreciate.

To me, the teen series have already achieved the upper limits of what the human body can withstand in terms of performance. Anything significantly beyond that and you'll need to take the pilot out of the cockpit.

They do have differences in strengths however:
F-14: Slow speed maneuverability, vertical maneuvers (B/D models)
F-15: High speed maneuverability, vertical maneuvers, high altitude maneuverability,
F-16: High energy, High speed maneuverability,
F/A-18: Slow speed maneuverability, High Alpha performance,

for the ATF program, the goal was to combine all of these into one platform and exceed them. Thats why the Raptor can beat an F-15 or F-16 or F/A-18 etc in their own games.

For the JSF program, the goal was just to combine the F-16 and F/A-18's strength which was still a monumental achievement and in my opinion is still more than good enough to win against anything.

Even in a gun fight it would still be dominant

[steve2267]

Thats why the Raptor can beat an F-15 or F-16 or F/A-18 etc in their own games.

I tend to agree here. While the F-35 appears to be able to hold its own against a Viper vis-a-vis an energy or rate fight, and be able to hold its own against a Hornet vis-a-vis a high alpha radius fight, my correspondence with a Lightning driver suggested it was more like:

A Viper? Cool... I can rate with him, but I'll beat him with a radius fight, but I have the power and acceleration if I need it.

A Hornet? Cool, I can hang with him nose high... but I'll just out rate him, but I can go nose high if I need it.

The picture I have is that no matter what the adversary tries, the F-35 has an answer... it's not a one trick pony; it's not limited to just trying to out-rate someone, or out-gee someone. It almost seems like the idiot savant of modern air combat.

[gta4]

No need of much talk. F-35's J-turn will kill everything.

[steve2267]

No need of much talk. F-35's J-turn will kill everything.

The J-turn is certainly a useful tool for the Lightning driver's toolbox... but just like everything else, using it at the wrong time will get the pilot D-E-D.

[awsome]

Neat discussion but just remember that this F-15 pilot can only say to the media what he has been told he can say. There is a thing called propaganda and both sides use it...