Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise.

Design and construction
Banned
 
Posts: 1545
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

by 1st503rdsgt » 04 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.


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

by cywolf32 » 04 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.


Elite 1K
Elite 1K
 
Posts: 1289
Joined: 07 Oct 2007, 18:52

by Scorpion82 » 04 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?


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 5912
Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

by sferrin » 04 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. . ."


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 679
Joined: 12 Jun 2012, 21:00

by bigjku » 04 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.


Banned
 
Posts: 1545
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

by 1st503rdsgt » 04 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.


Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
 
Posts: 919
Joined: 26 Oct 2010, 08:28
Location: Canada

by alloycowboy » 04 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.


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

by cywolf32 » 04 Nov 2012, 23:14

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


Elite 3K
Elite 3K
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

by quicksilver » 05 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).


Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2346
Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

by neurotech » 05 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.


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

by megasun » 05 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.


Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2303
Joined: 24 Mar 2007, 21:06
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

by johnwill » 05 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.


User avatar
Elite 5K
Elite 5K
 
Posts: 7505
Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

by XanderCrews » 05 Nov 2012, 02:47

falconedge wrote: ferry range


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


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

by velocityvector » 05 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.


Elite 2K
Elite 2K
 
Posts: 2346
Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

by neurotech » 05 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

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest