Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise.

[SpudmanWP]

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.

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

[SpudmanWP]

n/a

[discofishing]

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 )

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

[spazsinbad]

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?

[count_to_10]

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 )

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.

[gtx]

I wonder if Bill Sweetman will tell us about this at Ares.

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

[aceshigh]

Good news, cheers

[neurotech]

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.

[SpudmanWP]

BS

[Scorpion82]

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.

[cola]

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.

[SpudmanWP]

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.

[cola]

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.

[neurotech]

BS

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.

[count_to_10]

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.