Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise.

Design and construction
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

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

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:15

sketch22 wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:They may also be talking about either one aspect of it's RCS or overall RCS...

Do you mean like frontal RCS vs rear RCS?


No specifics were given, just
O’Bryan said the F-35 is an all-aspect stealth aircraft—that is to say, stealthy from any and all directions.



falconedge wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:From what I have read, supercruising uses 75%-100% more gas per mile than going m0.9. So if it's 150 at M1.2 then that would be about 250-300 subsonic.

can you explain why it still consume more gas if it is supercruise :)
btw how much gas the afterburner mode consume compared to normal dry thrust :?


Drag above mach is more than drag below mach.

For example if it only takes 75% of mil to maintain mach .9 and 100% to maintain m 1.2, then you will obviously use more gas per mile at m 1.2 than m .9.

It's a real drag ;)
Last edited by SpudmanWP on 03 Nov 2012, 20:19, edited 2 times in total.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

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

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:17

n/a
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:41

falconedge wrote:
sketch22 wrote:As I've mentioned in another thread, I chatted with "Hog" from the 461st and he confirmed that yes the F-35 can indeed supercruise. It takes afterburner to get past the sound barrier but once hes supersonic he can pull the power back to mil and it'll stay there around Mach 1.2.

:? it quite hard to understand , i dont get it , if the pilot pull the power back then the force will be decrease how could the f-35 still able to remain it's speed ???
( i mean it physics :shock: )


The Concorde was able to do the same thing. There's a video somewhere on youtube about this.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24877
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:44

Don't forget the F-35s have a variable afterburner. Some pilots have reported 'supercruising' in minimum A/B for example without specifying MACH as I recall - likely this info on this forum. HoKay?
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3300
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:49

discofishing wrote:
falconedge wrote:
sketch22 wrote:As I've mentioned in another thread, I chatted with "Hog" from the 461st and he confirmed that yes the F-35 can indeed supercruise. It takes afterburner to get past the sound barrier but once hes supersonic he can pull the power back to mil and it'll stay there around Mach 1.2.

:? it quite hard to understand , i dont get it , if the pilot pull the power back then the force will be decrease how could the f-35 still able to remain it's speed ???
( i mean it physics :shock: )


The Concorde was able to do the same thing. There's a video somewhere on youtube about this.

Generally, if you have a drag dominated top speed for a given thrust level, then you approach that speed asymptotically while at that thrust. It should formally take you forever to reach that speed unless you boost up above it with afterburner.
Offline

gtx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 658
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:50

sferrin wrote:I wonder if Bill Sweetman will tell us about this at Ares. ;-)


Probably...but he will spin it as a bad thing somehow :roll:
Offline

aceshigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 256
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2011, 19:26
  • Location: Norway

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:51

Good news, cheers :cheers:
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 21:47

IMO the whole F-35 Supercruise issue is partly marketing on LMs part.

Some jets (F-16s, Gripen) can fly supersonic in non-afterburner flight, but nowhere near the F-22s M1.8, which was LMs justification for the $140m F-22 over the Boeing F-15. Surprisingly, the Super Hornet will go supersonic above FL400 without burners, if the pylons are removed from the wings.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

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

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 21:53

BS

Image
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

Scorpion82

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1094
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 18:52

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 21:57

falconedge wrote: can you explain why it still consume more gas if it is supercruise :)
btw how much gas the afterburner mode consume compared to normal dry thrust :?


The faster the aircraft the more compressed is the air that's entering the intake. The result the engine will thus generate more thrust and that means its consumption grows as well.
Offline

cola

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 559
  • Joined: 18 May 2009, 00:52

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 22:07

SpudmanWP wrote:This confirms two things.
2. It can

Spudman...150 miles at M1.2/tropopause is about 13 minutes, worth of flying.
Since when, 13 minutes out of 4 hours theoretical max. endurance, classifies as "cruising"?
F16 also does dash supersonic in dry...that's not supercruising.
Cheers, Cola
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

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

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 22:14

Given that this is a LM quote, think of it in terms of their earlier quotes about the F-22's range and it's supercruise ability.

310+100nm


http://www.f22-raptor.com/technology/data.html

In other words, it's a dash not the total ability.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

cola

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 559
  • Joined: 18 May 2009, 00:52

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 22:25

Yes well, dash isn't cruising.
Not even O'Bryan claims the F35 supercruises.
Why giving such a pompous and misleading thread headline, then?

Also, not sure what is F18E's NATOPS supposed to prove.
The "fastest" configuration (1) still has two wing pylons and two AMRAAMs.
Cheers, Cola
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 22:29

SpudmanWP wrote:BS

Image

Thanks for the NATOPS page. I already have a copy of the F/A-18 E/F NATOPS Manual and familiar with the page you quote. The Super Hornet in the fleet flies with pylons on the wings which contributes significantly to the Supersonic drag. I specifically said without pylons for a reason. The page shows that the baseline configuration (1) is "AIM9(2) + AIM120(2)", which is not clean configuration.

The F/A-18E/F had issues with weapons separation, leading to canted pylons being used to ensure safe separation. This results in considerable Supersonic drag.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3300
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 22:31

This seems to hinge on definition of "supercruise".
If the definition is "maintain 1+ M without afterburner", then the F-35 does.
If the definition is "1.5+ M" or includes "does not loose significant range", then it doesn't.
When the term was first coined, the former was how it was used.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Design & Construction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests