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

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

eloise

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1833
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2015, 16:05

Unread post02 Apr 2018, 19:11

zero-one wrote: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

Vertical maneuver isn't F-14's strength, especially when comparing to F-15 and F-16. F-16 is extremely good with vertical maneuver and energy retention, and it's roll rate is much better than others teen series.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

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

Unread post02 Apr 2018, 19:18

awsome wrote:There is a thing called propaganda and both sides use it...
:doh:

Funny how that has not stopped WikiLeaks, F-22 pilots talking about hypoxia problems, T-45 pilots from basically going on strike over hypoxia, etc from exposing negative information about programs.

Sorry, I must have forgotten the golden rule of the ABJ crowd, that being "All good news is propaganda and all bad news is gospel".
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

awsome

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 186
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2008, 03:11
  • Location: vancouver

Unread post02 Apr 2018, 21:54

SpudmanWP wrote:
awsome wrote:There is a thing called propaganda and both sides use it...
:doh:

Funny how that has not stopped WikiLeaks, F-22 pilots talking about hypoxia problems, T-45 pilots from basically going on strike over hypoxia, etc from exposing negative information about programs.

Sorry, I must have forgotten the golden rule of the ABJ crowd, that being "All good news is propaganda and all bad news is gospel".



I didn't know wikileaks flew any training missions against the F-35. That said when a single comment by an Eagle driver gets the sh!t extrapolated out of it by the F-16.net crowd it seems prudent to remind you that it is basically meaningless...
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

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

Unread post02 Apr 2018, 22:05

Look what a single, out of context CLAWs test qoute did.

It's also not a "single" comment... It's every comment. You can look at virtually every article quoting an F-35 pilot or other Officer in the F-35 program and they're all called propaganda.

As far as WikiLeaks goes, that's more of a "The absence of evidence is evidence of absence" thing.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

nutshell

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 469
  • Joined: 04 May 2016, 13:37

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 00:31

"sometimes"...

Lol, when i ball a bit with friends, i sometimes cross the sh*t over a former professional BBall player (Italian Seria A1, a 6"7 small forward) and get some fancy finisher under the rim.

That doesn't stop him from stripping the ball out of my hands MOST of the times and, at the end, school me pretty much every ****** time.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 02:25

The F-16 is more than just a good "high speed" maneuvering jet. The early A blocks were pretty good at the low,mid end. At altitude and 150 KCAS he will be at Ps=0, while the F-14, F-18 will still be at negative Ps. The YF-16 beat the YF-17 for a reason.



Also, Turn radius= 96.8*KTAS/rate of turn.
F-18C at sea level of 19.2DPS (assuming this figure is near or around .6IMN, maybe .55) vs Block 50 at sea level of 18.2 DPS (at/near .6IMN). (17.7DPS-906lbs ((since losing the 2 Aim-120's and their pylon/adapters.)) The Hornet only has a little over a 100ft turn radius advantage. That figure is just not earth shattering. And the 19.2 is at the Hornet's Ps spike, the F-16's figure is still increasing up its horizontal plateau.



Now initial turn radius at max lift is a different story. But, it will only last just a few seconds.
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 04:35

gta4 wrote: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.


The A-10 corners really well at low speed. I have seen E-M diagrams showing turn rates just short of F-16 at low altitude.
Offline
User avatar

element1loop

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

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

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 04:43

gta4 wrote:No need of much talk. F-35's J-turn will kill everything.


And that's what you need to rapidly manage aspect and signature. Fast rudder turns to manage aspect to a popup or to defeat a missile. It's not a lucky-dip, F-35 was designed specifically to be able to flat turn really fast.

AOA nose pointing can do similar, plus pointing can rapidly cool low thermal inertia leading edges, rapidly dumping speed to shrink IR detection footprint, making any missile or sensor struggle.

High acceleration, to get out of an area fast, where you're getting squeezed by converging sensor platforms, or else used to get you into an MDF-aided optimal ambush aspect, against an A2A target. And also 'flat' (no alt change) AOA, used as a large 'airbrake', to manage low obvervability again once where you need to be for best advantage.

(you could just, "hit the brakes and he'll fly right by" ... :P )

All of the presumed 'ACM optimisations', are actually duel-use stealth-fighter tactics optimisations, as that is the overiding intent of the F-35's design---not ACM.

As far as I'm concerned, regular ACM training is like going to the gym, it keeps you 'fighting-fit' for A2A agility fighting, and increases airmanship skills and feel, but for an unseen, signature/aspect managing BVR ambush, agility and maneuvering missile fight, which also fights to maintain radius, to enhance VLO advantage.

A higher thrust engine upgrade and a DAS/EOTS upgrade will also aim to maintain F-35 stealth-fighting BVR tactics advantages, for longer.

That's how F-35 will really fight, in high-intensity, so that's why it was designed with both VLO, and AGILITY.

i.e. the concept of stealth aircraft moving more towards a lower-agility or lower-performance 'sensor-shooter' role has been a bit overblown.

Stealth fighting tactics, and its essential optimal signature, aspect and radius management (in near real-time), is actually ENABLED through high-agility and superior energy recovery acceleration, in another direction.

As with a gunfighting, if you keep flying straight, level and predictably, you'll get hit sooner. Agility makes you a harder defensive target---at any range. Agility also gets you to the offensive position/condition sooner, at any range. The better the high AOA nose-pointing (all axis) and the higher the transonic energy-recovery and the raw agility, within stealth fighting, using missiles, the better off the pilot will be in every part of the fight.
Accel + Alt + VLO + DAS + MDF + Radial Distance = LIFE . . . Always choose Stealth
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3537
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 07:23

awsome wrote: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...

Pilots aren't given scripts. What they're allowed to say is based upon OPSEC, not some approved narrative.
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 918
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 11:04

f-16adf wrote:The F-16 is more than just a good "high speed" maneuvering jet. The early A blocks were pretty good at the low,mid end. At altitude and 150 KCAS he will be at Ps=0, while the F-14, F-18 will still be at negative Ps. The YF-16 beat the YF-17 for a reason.



Also, Turn radius= 96.8*KTAS/rate of turn.
F-18C at sea level of 19.2DPS (assuming this figure is near or around .6IMN, maybe .55) vs Block 50 at sea level of 18.2 DPS (at/near .6IMN). (17.7DPS-906lbs ((since losing the 2 Aim-120's and their pylon/adapters.)) The Hornet only has a little over a 100ft turn radius advantage. That figure is just not earth shattering. And the 19.2 is at the Hornet's Ps spike, the F-16's figure is still increasing up its horizontal plateau.



Now initial turn radius at max lift is a different story. But, it will only last just a few seconds.


Sorry but you are comparing F18's turn rate with 2 amraams + 2 winders against viper's turn rate with 6 amraams
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2331
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 12:04

eloise wrote:Vertical maneuver isn't F-14's strength, especially when comparing to F-15 and F-16. F-16 is extremely good with vertical maneuver and energy retention, and it's roll rate is much better than others teen series.


I've read that Tomcats would go vertical against hornets cause they were dead if they tried to turn with it. but yeah, maybe against a viper or Eagle it would still be deficient.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 12:45

F-18 has 60% internal fuel, 2 Aim-120, 2 Aim-9.



F-16 Block 50 =26,000lbs

empty jet= 19260lbs
2 Aim-9= 390lbs
4 Aim-120= 1360lbs
20mm ammo= 287lbs
4 pylon+adapter= 452lbs

=21749lbs


26000lbs-21749lbs=4251lbs
Meaning the Block 50 has an internal fuel weight of 4251lbs or 59.4% (basically 60%)


So drop off 2 Aim-120 and their pylon/adapters to be equal with the Hornets, which will equal=906lbs.


Use the GW chart and adjust it: 17.7 +.5=18.2DPS
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 918
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 14:21

f-16adf wrote:F-18 has 60% internal fuel, 2 Aim-120, 2 Aim-9.



F-16 Block 50 =26,000lbs

empty jet= 19260lbs
2 Aim-9= 390lbs
4 Aim-120= 1360lbs
20mm ammo= 287lbs
4 pylon+adapter= 452lbs

=21749lbs


26000lbs-21749lbs=4251lbs
Meaning the Block 50 has an internal fuel weight of 4251lbs or 59.4% (basically 60%)


So drop off 2 Aim-120 and their pylon/adapters to be equal with the Hornets, which will equal=906lbs.

Use the GW chart and adjust it: 17.7 +.5=18.2DPS


1) F-16 already has 2 tip launchers included in the basic aircraft. No need to count it twice.
2) F-16C block 50 can sustain 18.5 deg/sec at 26000lbs, with drag index = 50, which equals 6 amraams + pylons. I don't see how it is adjusted to 18.2 deg/sec with less drag index.
26000lb.jpg
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 918
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 14:27

Oh I see. You are citing F-16's non-peak STR against F-18's peak STR.
You are assuming F-18's peak STR is achieved at M0.6 (which is not proven), so you cited F-16's STR at Mach 0.6 and pit it against F-18.
Offline

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 756
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post03 Apr 2018, 15:10

Yes, I am assuming that the Hornet with its 20 degree wing (kinda similar to the Tomcat's 20 degree wing) will have its best rate of turn at or around .55-.6IMN. Give or take...

I don't have any Hornet charts. But as JBGator said, the Hornet has a spike, not a plateau. Once it reaches its spike it starts to fall back down.
Previous

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests