Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise.

Design and construction
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 20:30

falconedge wrote:how far can the F-35 fly at top speed mach 1.6 ? , if it can only fly for 150 miles at mach 1.2 then the distance it can fly at mach 1.6 will even shorter right ?
btw even the F-22 which is designed to supercruise can only maintain mach 1.82 for 100 nm (185 km ) :shock: not very impress if go know that F-22's ferry range is over 3000 km :?

Here's a dirty little secret that might save you from being shocked into a heart-attack. Most "supersonic" fighters rarely fly at supersonic speeds.
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline

cywolf32

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 623
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005, 12:04
  • Location: USA

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 21:29

Wow, and the ego's continue. Not impressive? Show another acft which can do this with a regular combat load and maintain a 9G envelope. Show me another fighter acft with production AESA capabilities on par. Show me another acft built in 3 separate configurations of a fifth gen nature. Honestly, I am sick and tired of innate discussion about this program. If you can possibly do something better, do it. Otherwise, your wasting my time typing this ridiculous response. It amazes me still today that people cannot grasp what is being asked of the F-35.
Offline

Scorpion82

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

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

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 21:36

There are enough aircraft out there capable of pulling 9 g with a combat load. There's nothing special about this per se. The question to ask what that combat load includes and what's the g envelope?
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5600
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 21:46

1st503rdsgt wrote:Here's a dirty little secret that might save you from being shocked into a heart-attack. Most "supersonic" fighters rarely fly at supersonic speeds.


Dude, if it says in the brochure that an aircraft's max speed is Mach 2.2 and it's range is 1200 miles then that means it can go Mach 2.2 for 1200 miles. Geez. ;-)
"There I was. . ."
Offline

bigjku

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 679
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2012, 21:00

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 22:02

Scorpion82 wrote:There are enough aircraft out there capable of pulling 9 g with a combat load. There's nothing special about this per se. The question to ask what that combat load includes and what's the g envelope?


I would say that the relevant measure would be pulling that turn carrying 4,000 pounds of bombs and 2 AAM's. I don't think anything else can do that.
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 22:06

sferrin wrote:Dude, if it says in the brochure that an aircraft's max speed is Mach 2.2 and it's range is 1200 miles then that means it can go Mach 2.2 for 1200 miles. Geez. ;-)

And it had better do it no matter what the weather conditions are or what altitudes are flown. :lmao:
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline

alloycowboy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 827
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2010, 08:28
  • Location: Canada

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 22:22

1st503rdsgt wrote:And it had better do it no matter what the weather conditions are or what altitudes are flown. :lmao:


The important thing to note here is that the F-35 is optimized to work in the transonic speed range unlike the F-22 which is optimized to work in the supersonic speed range. So the F-35 is a much more useful airplane as it is designed to be its most efficient when flying at speeds where the airplane spends most of its time.

I think this is one of the reasons why the Pentagon clipped the F-22's wings.
Offline

cywolf32

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 623
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005, 12:04
  • Location: USA

Unread post04 Nov 2012, 23:14

Show me one acft that can pull 9g's with a similar combat load installed, I beg you!!
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3164
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post05 Nov 2012, 00:04

cywolf32 wrote:Wow, and the ego's continue. Not impressive? Show another acft which can do this with a regular combat load and maintain a 9G envelope. Show me another fighter acft with production AESA capabilities on par. Show me another acft built in 3 separate configurations of a fifth gen nature. Honestly, I am sick and tired of innate discussion about this program. If you can possibly do something better, do it. Otherwise, your wasting my time typing this ridiculous response. It amazes me still today that people cannot grasp what is being asked of the F-35.


Trust you mean 'inane'... :wink:

It's kinda like some of the National Parks -- i.e. don't feed the (trolls).
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

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

Unread post05 Nov 2012, 00:11

Scorpion82 wrote:There are enough aircraft out there capable of pulling 9 g with a combat load. There's nothing special about this per se. The question to ask what that combat load includes and what's the g envelope?

Source for that? :D

F/A-18 - 7.5G Limit - Except F-18 (aka Swiss Hornet) is cleared to 9G envelope A/A only.
F-16 is < 7.5G Max with A/G loadout.

F-15 is cleared to 9.0G Max with A/G loadout. ~ 250 jets in US Service.
The F-22 is also cleared to 9.0G with A/G loadout. 180 jets in Service.

The F-22 & F-35 without external stores can still have a combat load-out internally for A/G deployment. A 4th Gen fighter without external stores is basically an airshow jet. Has any A/G combat mission been flown in a F-16 without wing stores?

Edit: 220 F-15E Strike Eagles as well. The 250 F-15s are referenced above are F-15C/D Eagle's most of which are 9G rated. All F-15A/Bs are now retired from USAF/ANG service.
Last edited by neurotech on 05 Nov 2012, 01:57, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

megasun

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2012, 20:14
  • Location: CA

Unread post05 Nov 2012, 00:39

cywolf32 wrote:Show me one acft that can pull 9g's with a similar combat load installed, I beg you!!


Well, I actually doubt the envelope would be quite limited for F-35 to make a 9G turn "with a full load of fuel and missiles", considering the weight and Wing Loading ratio, especially sustained turn.
Offline

johnwill

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2150
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007, 21:06
  • Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Unread post05 Nov 2012, 02:03

thegroundeffect wrote:
From Mach .8 the drag on an aircraft wil start to incease significantly and will peak at Mach 1. After mach 1 the aerodynamic drag wil decrease, thus making it possible to fly faster with lower thrust. This is a characteristic that can only be found in aircraft. And this is the reason why legacy aircraft had to 'dive through' the sound barrier because they lacked the thrust to plow through it.


That is a profoundly untrue statement. The drag on an airplane starts to increase as soon as the takeoff roll begins. What you are saying is true for the drag coefficient, but not drag. Drag is drag coefficient multiplied by dynamic pressure and a reference area, usually nominal wing area. Dynamic pressure is density times velocity squared, with appropriate unit adjustments.

So, while drag coefficient may peak at mach 1, drag generally increases above mach 1, depending on how quickly the coefficient peak drops off compared to velocity increase.

Your statement about only airplanes can fly (move) faster with less thrust is also not true. Planing boats possess the same characteristic, something like passing through the back side of the power curve for an airplane.

Third and fourth generation legacy fighters have no trouble punching through the mach in level flight. If they dive to go supersonic, it's to save fuel.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6470
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post05 Nov 2012, 02:47

falconedge wrote: ferry range


Finally someone brings up the true measurement of a warplane. :P
Offline

velocityvector

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 171
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2009, 04:21
  • Location: Chicago

Unread post05 Nov 2012, 02:56

XanderCrews wrote:
falconedge wrote: ferry range


Finally someone brings up the true measurement of a warplane. :P
I wanna hear about the pee tube. All three genders.
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

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

Unread post05 Nov 2012, 03:52

johnwill wrote:Third and fourth generation legacy fighters have no trouble punching through the mach in level flight. If they dive to go supersonic, it's to save fuel.

"no trouble" ? An F-16 or F/A-18? and with how what external stores configuration?

Wing tanks and combat A/G bomb load?
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Design & Construction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest