F-35 JSF vs Eurofighter Typhoon

monkeypilot · by **monkeypilot** » 10 Dec 2017, 21:43

Qatar fianlized contract for 24 EF today.

optimist · by **optimist** » 10 Dec 2017, 21:49

WL, It's funny because they are trying to say. The superhornet are debatably similar to 30 year old aircraft used for the evals base lines. Typhoon came behind the superhornet in the eval, The rafale is still debatable to the the current rhino. Though you have to give it to the rhino on radar and weapons, the rest is semantics. I can't see anyone making a case against the rhino/gowler winning, whatever 4.5gen eval some country would like to dream up.
Then in the same breath, try and put the eurocanards on the same page as the f-35. :doh:

white_lightning35 · by **white_lightning35** » 10 Dec 2017, 22:44

optimist wrote:WL, It's funny because they are trying to say. The superhornet are debatably similar to 30 year old aircraft used for the evals base lines. Typhoon came behind the superhornet in the eval, The rafale is still debatable to the the current rhino. Though you have to give it to the rhino on radar and weapons, the rest is semantics. I can't see anyone making a case against the rhino/gowler winning, whatever 4.5gen eval some country would like to dream up.
Then in the same breath, try and put the eurocanards on the same page as the f-35.

It is strange. You summed it up perfectly: They claim that the evals imply that the ecanards are equal or a little better than the SH, while also claiming the same about the f-35. I don't believe there is a single thing the SH does better than the f-35. At least the other legacy platforms can debate about their WVR superiority, which the SH can not. And the gap between the F-35 and legacy fighters will continue to grow. People have witnessed what a 3i f-35 can do; a 3F f-35 is on another level.

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 10 Dec 2017, 23:17

swiss wrote:Im curious. On which technical level is a Danish F-16 MLU? Comparable to a block 50/52?

Danish MLUs are a mixture of Block 10 and Block 15 airframes - so although lower thrust the upgraded block 15s on the face of it look similar to the USAF Block 50/52 CCIP - with Data Links, TGPs, AMRAAM, AIM-9X, AIFF and also use Denmark developed pylon mounted Jammers and UV missile detectors. Cant say how well the radar holds up today - but modern Block 50/52 +s sold internationally have internal Electronic Warfare suites, CFTs and should have a better radar ( APG-68(v)9 ).

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 11 Dec 2017, 00:36

white_lightning35 wrote:Some people after hearing that might think "see? it's made for A2G. Something,something, pierre sprey, something something, can't turn, can't climb, can't run, hurr durr......" . I think it was designed for A2G work. However, by virtue of the capabilities it needs to succeed in its mission, it has very excellent capabilities in other areas. The world doesn't revolve around sustained turn rates and top speed anymore. The f-35 was not designed to dogfight, but because of the abilities it needed elsewhere it is very capable at it. IMO, stealth, EW, connectivity, and force mulitplying are what the important things are. The world isn't just "go up and look for people to dogfight with". Nothing flies alone. The f-35's data collecting and sharing takes this to the next level. I think about those creatures in Star Trek (no,not the borg. Forgot their names.) who operate seamlessly with one another. (hopefully the f-35's don't have some stupid " hack into their system and take them all down" thing)

I have a problem with the statement "the F-35 was not designed to dogfight." On the one hand, what does that mean, exactly? Was the F-16 designed to dogfight? What about the F-18? The reason I ask is because two requirements of the F-35 was that it possess F-16 like acceleration and F/A-18 like nose pointing ability. From a Bee pilot, the F-35 has nose pointing ability like an F/A-18, and acceleration like an F-16C Block 50. That is nothing to sneeze at. While an F/A-18 may have a "slight" edge in nose pointing over an F-35, the F-35 can outrate the Hornet. While an F-16C Blk 50 may have a slight sustained turn rate advantage (not very large), the F-35 has a turn radius advantage. That is, the F-35 can defeat both the F-16C Blk50 and an F/A-18. That was by design. So I'm not sure I agree with the statement "the F-35 was not designed to dogfight." I think it was designed to defeat all known threats kinematically, yet that was not the primary or principle thrust of the type.

optimist · by **optimist** » 11 Dec 2017, 02:32

Can we at least wait till the flight control is finished, before we bag it? The f-35 is going to hold it's own in a guns dogfight. This will become apparent with DACT in red flag and such. (I would like to see the C, it is going to turn heads)

In the real world of min 4 ship packs. Anyone that get's into WVR, let alone a guns dogfight, will be buying beer for a month. It's not the CONOPS of the f-35.

white_lightning35 · by **white_lightning35** » 11 Dec 2017, 03:09

When and where did I say it can't dogfight? I stated that it is very capable at it, but I just don't want to overestimate its' capabilities in that area. My belief is just that it is not wise to assume that the f-35 can take down all threats WVR. The legacy planes and su-57 are probably still very dangerous in that area.

I'll paste what I said again to perhaps it clear what I meant: The f-35 was not designed to dogfight, but because of the abilities it needed elsewhere it is very capable at it.

Overestimating one's capabilities never ends well. The f-35 will be very capable WVR. However, it's capability gap is greatly diminshed in that area, IMO.

optimist · by **optimist** » 11 Dec 2017, 03:28

Wait and see what the f-35c does. There are a lot of unknowns, but I don't think I'm overestimating a DACT encounter. It really isn't that bad. Subsonic acceleration of the f-22, with a similar wing loading and AoA. A sustained 15kft m.8, 5g turn, with a 'tuned' state of the art flight control system.

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 11 Dec 2017, 03:32

white_lightning35 wrote:I'll paste what I said again to perhaps it clear what I meant: The f-35 was not designed to dogfight, but because of the abilities it needed elsewhere it is very capable at it.

I heard you the first time. With respect, I disagree with your statement that "the F-35 was not designed to dogfight". IMO, the requirements for F-16 like acceleration and F-18 like high AOA / nose pointing clearly demonstrate that ability to dogfight was a design requirement. If they were not, then an A-7 like strike aircraft performance with F-117 like low observability would have fit the bill and a LOT of money could have been saved vis-a-vis meeting performance requirements.

white_lightning35 wrote:Overestimating one's capabilities never ends well. The f-35 will be very capable WVR. However, it's capability gap is greatly diminshed in that area, IMO.

I agree it is not wise to overestimate one's capabilities, but I do not believe I have done so. However, that being said, based on what I have read here and elsewhere, the F-35 knifefighting ability in the phone booth appears to be second only to the F-22. But as has been made plainly evident, esp. here on this forum, in today's age with HOBS missiles and HMS, no one should really want to go WVR anymore. It's more like mutual suicide / roll the dice -- even though its fun to argue and debate who is better at BFM / guns only / training sorties.

White_lightning, I am slightly confused by your use of the phrase "it's capability gap is greatly diminished." That reads to me like you are saying the F-35 lags (i.e. is inferior to) other aircraft in the WVR arena.

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 11 Dec 2017, 03:40

optimist wrote:Wait and see what the f-35c does. There are a lot of unknowns, but I don't think I'm overestimating a DACT encounter. It really isn't that bad. Subsonic acceleration of the f-22, with a similar wing loading and AoA. A sustained 5g turn, with a 'tuned' state of the art flight control system.

The F-16 sustains a high-g turn better than the MiG-29, has better outside visibility, is more responsive and easier to fly, rolls significantly faster and will out accelerate the MiG-29 like the Fulcrum was glued to the floor (the Block 50 F-16 will out accelerate the Raptor below about 25,000 ft).

-- fulcrumflyer 1-9-2007
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread233946/pg2

Considering the source of the quote, it sounds like subsonically the Lightning will outrun the Raptor. So much for "mediocre kinematic performance" Mujumdar seems to think the F-35 possesses.

I have some additional thoughts I would like to post, but I am awaiting permission to quote someone. Suffice it to say that what I was told shed new light, for me at least, on the statements Billie Flynn made regarding F-35 E-M diagrams, and the other vignette posted here this past year where the F-16C pilot exclaimed to his F-35 buddy, "What did you do to your jet!?!"

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 11 Dec 2017, 04:00

Honestly, we only really know about a tenth of what the F-35 can really do.... :wink:

white_lightning35 · by **white_lightning35** » 11 Dec 2017, 04:11

steve2267 wrote:
Whte_lightning, I am slightly confused by your use of the phrase "it's capability gap is greatly diminished." That reads to me like you are saying the F-35 lags (i.e. is inferior to) other aircraft in the WVR arena.

What I meant when I said its capability gap is diminished is that it is extremely dominant in BVR, but not as dominant WVR.

As you said, getting into dogfights is a very bad idea for staying alive now. I think the f-35 will do very well in that area. But, I guess that I am just not as confident in it in that area as some of the others here are.

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 11 Dec 2017, 05:07

white_lightning35 wrote:What I meant when I said its capability gap is diminished is that it is extremely dominant in BVR, but not as dominant WVR.

Thanks for clarifying. I thought it was something along those lines, but wasn't sure when I re-read it.

white_lightning35 wrote:
As you said, getting into dogfights is a very bad idea for staying alive now. I think the f-35 will do very well in that area. But, I guess that I am just not as confident in it in that area as some of the others here are.

FWIW, I agree. My confidence lies more in BFM / DAC training, and less in the real deal because of HOBS heat seekers and HMS targeting systems.

Here's another way to think about it...

Offer a Viper pilot...

A Block 50 Viper with more gas, but doesn't have to lug it around in bags, the nose pointing and min radius ability of a Hornet, and a genuine disappear switch that really works so that he truly is invisible to 'dar. Toss in a God's Eye View of the battlepace, the mother of all AESA radars ('cept the F-22), and the mother of all HMS. What Viper pilot wouldn't take that? What Viper pilot wouldn't kick a$$ with that?

Offer a Hornet pilot...

A Hornet with four motors (that accelerates like a bigmouth Block 50 F-16), the mother of all AESA radars ('cept for the Raptor), the continuous turn rate of a Viper, a genuine disappar switch that really works, the mother of all HMS helmets, and a God's Eye View of the battlespace? (OH yeah... and tons more gas than a Hornet without the bags.) What Bug pilot would turn that down? What Bug (or Rhino) pilot wouldn't kick serious a$$ with that?

Offer the F-117 pilot...

An F-117 that is actually stealthier, has a God's eye view of the battlespace with a humongous LPI radar, but with the acceleration and turn rate of an F-16 Blk 50, the high AOA and min radius ability of a Hornet. What Goblin driver wouldn't suddenly become Maverick on steroids?

The picture that is being painted for me is one of an aircraft that is really an idiot savante of air-to-air combat. No matter what you do, it has an answer. Are you a rate aircraft? He'll out-radius you and get his nose on you. Are you a radius / high AOA aircraft? He can play that game too, but he'll probably just out rate you, and bleed you down 'til you're out of energy, out of ideas.

It strikes me as the "whatever you can do, I can do better" bully... but can back up his words with actions.

It's no wonder the pilots appear to be in such awe of their steed. And that doesn't even start to address the SA advantages.

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 11 Dec 2017, 05:13

I'm also reminded of the quote by the USAF general that went something like (my paraphrasing), "The best air-to-ground fighter in the world is the F-22, except for the F-35. The best air-to-air fighter in the world is the F-35, except for the F-22."

These words seem truer and truer the more I learn about the F-35.

optimist · by **optimist** » 11 Dec 2017, 05:41

No one who has had the "real" look, has come away saying it's rubbish.
An anon USN guy said "Well, for me, at the time, it was pretty cool. I’m definitely not someone on the leading edge of EW & EA like some here. Today however, I did get a classified brief on F-35 that filled in all the “gaps” in my knowledge. Definitely some cool stuff !!!"