[Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 11:13
by spazsinbad
Out of the SHADOWS [SIX Page PDF attached]
May 2018 Frank Crébas

"...New jet, new missions
While technicians have gained valuable experience of turning spanners on the F-35, the four Dutch Lightning II pilots have striven to understand the aircraft from a tactical perspective. ‘We worked on getting a better understanding of how we can execute the D-SEAD [destructive suppression of enemy air defenses] mission — it’s a new mission set the F-35 brings to the RNLAF,’ adds De Smit. ‘Additionally, we have been looking at how we can execute mission concepts that are very familiar to us like close air support [CAS]. The new variable message format [VMF] is the new datalink protocol that we use to talk to ground forces. VMF is fully digital and enables us to send, in addition to voice commands, imagery back and forth to the JTACs [joint terminal attack controllers]. In addition, the synthetic aperture radar can make images from a long distance through the weather. This is a whole new aspect in the CAS mission and will be a game-changer in the dialogue between JTAC and pilot because it offers a new way of finding and verifying targets.’

Within the detachment, the 323rd Test and Evaluation Squadron (TES) commander Lt Col Ian ‘Gladys’ Knight is leading the way when it comes to Dutch experience with the F-35. ‘In CAS’, he says, ‘VMF gives us options for supporting ground forces in a way we never had in the F-16. Instead of using voice radios and getting eyes on the target using a targeting pod close-in, we’re able to use the SAR to make images of the target area and generate very accurate target co-ordinates. We pass these to the ground forces and confirm a target location using VMF from beyond visual range, assuring that enemy forces are not alerted to our air presence. All the while we can be flying in pretty bad weather with long on-station times. This would have been impossible to do with our F-16s.’..."
&
"...While a lot of missions are conducted with the JOTT partners, the Dutch F-35s periodically fly with the 148th Fighter Squadron ‘Kickin’ a$$’, the RNLAF’s F-16 training unit in Tucson, Arizona, to evaluate and validate new tactics. ‘The first time we got to test all these advanced capabilities to their fullest potential was about a year ago, with and against our F-16s in Tucson,’ says Knight.

‘The initial scenario was that our two F-35s would escort a four-ship of F-16s across a notional border and protect them against another eight-ship of F-16s simulating a modern adversary. A relatively inexperienced flight leader was in charge of the F-16s on our side and Lt Col Joost ‘Niki’ Luijsterburg, the Tucson detachment commander, was responsible for the adversaries. Up to this point we had only practised these scenarios in the simulators and while we had a decent game-plan, we were all anxious to see how the F-35 would perform in real life. We figured that the F-35’s stealth would keep us out of harm’s way for most of the fight, but that we also need to protect the friendly F-16s, maximize the lethality of their missiles and get them to the target.

To make this happen, we planned to initially use electronic attack against the adversary F-16s, see if we could avoid having them detect friendly fighters and datalink the location of the hostile aircraft to our F-16s. This way we could use the F-16s on our side to shoot down the initial wave of enemy fighters and keep our own missiles available once the ‘Blue Air’ F-16s had to focus on their target attack. The plan worked flawlessly.

‘In the debrief ‘Niki’ told us it was one of the most memorable sorties he had ever flown. Having previously worked in the F-35 program office he was elated to find out how effective the F-35 was, but at the same time he was frustrated by not getting a single shot off the rail against us, while getting killed multiple times. After that sortie it really hit us that the F-35 was going to make a big difference in how we operate fighters and other assets in the Royal Netherlands Air Force.’...
&
"...Dogfighting in the F-35...
...‘The F-35 is a very different aircraft, and it took pilots a while to adjust and figure out how to max-perform it. What didn’t help is that until about 18 months ago we were restricted in envelope, which meant we couldn’t pull as much g as we wanted to, nor fly with high-alpha. It was an eye-opener for all of us when those restrictions were lifted and we finally got to see the full potential. Actually, it was an eye-opener for a lot of adversary pilots as well.’

The F-35 is far larger than the F-16, and it carries twice as much fuel and three times the payload. ‘Consequently, the F-35 loses energy a bit faster than the F-16 at higher speeds,’ continues Knight. ‘But the slow-speed handling is amazing. The F-35 pilot has the option to continuously point the nose at the adversary, even at ridiculously slow speeds, which is a great capability to have in combination with high off-boresight missiles and a helmet-mounted sight. You need to be careful maneuvering the aircraft at higher speeds, because if you keep pulling back on the stick the aircraft will give you as much alpha as it can, but it will bleed a lot of energy in the process. It’s up to the pilot to recognize when to try to maintain airspeed and energy and when to give that away to prosecute with missiles or guns. I typically tell new pilots that the F-35 sits somewhere in between the F-16 and F/A-18 when it comes to within visual range maneuvering.’

Knight divulged a little more information about flying basic fighter maneuvers (BFM) in an F-35. ‘When our envelope was cleared to practise BFM we got the opportunity to fight some fourth-generation fighters. Remember, back then the rumors were that the F-35 was a pig. The first time the opponents showed up [in the training area] they had wing tanks along with a bunch of missiles. I guess they figured that being in a dirty configuration wouldn’t really matter and that they would still easily outmaneuver us. By the end of the week, though, they had dropped their wing tanks, transitioned to a single centerline fuel tank and were still doing everything they could not to get gunned by us. A week later they stripped the jets clean of all external stores, which made the BFM fights interesting, to say the least…

‘High-g maneuvering is fun, but having high fuel capacity and the ability to carry lots of stores is great too. During the weeks when we were flying BFM we also needed to drop a GBU-12 [laser-guided bomb] on the China Lake weapons range. Back in our F-16 days we’d have had to choose, since there is no way you can BFM with a bomb on your wing, let alone having the fuel to fly both missions in a single sortie. With the F-35, however, this isn’t much of an issue. On one of the sorties, my colleague, Maj Pascal ‘Smiley’ Smaal, decided he would fly BFM and still have enough fuel to go to the range afterwards and drop his weapon. During the debrief, the adversary pilot told us he was confused as to why we went to the range after the fight. When ‘Smiley’ told him that he was carrying an inert GBU-12 the entire time and that he then dropped it afterwards during a test event, the silence on the other end of the line was golden.’..."

Source: Combat Aircraft May 2018 Vol.19 No.5

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 14:08
by steve2267
But... but... but... it can't turn!

:roll:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 15:14
by mk82
Very cool! The clearest indication to date how the F35 (at least the A variant) performs in BFM/Dogfights. Loving how the adversary pilots initially underestimated the F35 in BFM.....their flippant attitude quickly changing to exasperation and surprise lol :mrgreen: . And the F35 performing BFM competently whilst carrying GBU 12s internally......damn!!!! As Lt Col Ian “Gladys” Knight inferred....love to see a fourth generation platform try to do that!

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 19:38
by marsavian
Mimicking a Growler against adversary aircraft ... amazing.

While a lot of missions are conducted
with the JOTT partners, the Dutch F-35s
periodically fly with the 148th Fighter
Squadron ‘Kickin’ a$$’, the RNLAF’s
F-16 training unit in Tucson, Arizona,
to evaluate and validate new tactics.
‘The first time we got to test all these
advanced capabilities to their fullest
potential was about a year ago, with and
against our F-16s in Tucson,’ says Knight.

‘The initial scenario was that our two
F-35s would escort a four-ship of F-16s
across a notional border and protect
them against another eight-ship of
F-16s simulating a modern adversary. A
relatively inexperienced flight leader was
in charge of the F-16s on our side and Lt
Col Joost ‘Niki’ Luijsterburg, the Tucson
detachment commander, was responsible
for the adversaries. Up to this point we
had only practised these scenarios in the
simulators and while we had a decent
game-plan, we were all anxious to see
how the F-35 would perform in real life.
We figured that the F-35’s stealth would
keep us out of harm’s way for most of the
fight, but that we also need to protect the
friendly F-16s, maximize the lethality of
their missiles and get them to the target.

To make this happen, we planned to
initially use electronic attack against the
adversary F-16s, see if we could avoid
having them detect friendly fighters and
datalink the location of the hostile aircraft
to our F-16s. This way we could use the
F-16s on our side to shoot down the initial
wave of enemy fighters and keep our own
missiles available once the ‘Blue Air’ F-16s
had to focus on their target attack. The
plan worked flawlessly.

‘In the debrief ‘Niki’ told us it was one
of the most memorable sorties he had
ever flown. Having previously worked in
the F-35 program office he was elated to
find out how effective the F-35 was, but
at the same time he was frustrated by not
getting a single shot off the rail against us,
while getting killed multiple times. After
that sortie it really hit us that the F-35 was
going to make a big difference in how we
operate fighters and other assets in the
Royal Netherlands Air Force.’

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 20:31
by castlebravo
marsavian wrote:Mimicking a Growler against adversary aircraft ... amazing.


Cooperative EW. If an F-35 can hide an F-16 from other fighters, imagine how hard it is to track an F-35 being protected by another F-35. Now imagine how hard it is for the tiny little seeker head on an active guided missile to track an F-35 being protected by another F-35.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 20:49
by SpudmanWP
It plays havoc with Home-on-Jam features as it can be jammed from multiple angles that turn off if the missile starts to point at the jammer.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 22:11
by ricnunes
The ability to perform BFM (and being superior in the process) while carrying GBU-12s is indeed eye watering! :D

I wonder what the critics will say now? (This is a rhetoric question, BTW)

Thanks for sharing the article spazsinbad :thumb:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 22:50
by spazsinbad
:drool: :shock: :mrgreen: Apologies to F-14 Squadron VF-32 :devil: 8) :roll: That first one is a tiny woven badge image.

https://i.pinimg.com/236x/f5/08/47/f508 ... 3748cf.jpg Meanwhile back at the hooch.... Smaller GIF is my solution to 'transparent GIFs' which is: use Windows Colours Dummy! :doh:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2018, 23:54
by popcorn
LOL... Red Vipers couldn't even get off a single missile vs Blue in the process of getting whacked multiple times. Not looking good for those looking to turn and burn with the new jet. LOL.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 01:08
by marsavian
castlebravo wrote:
marsavian wrote:Mimicking a Growler against adversary aircraft ... amazing.


Cooperative EW. If an F-35 can hide an F-16 from other fighters, imagine how hard it is to track an F-35 being protected by another F-35. Now imagine how hard it is for the tiny little seeker head on an active guided missile to track an F-35 being protected by another F-35.


Just two F-35s hid four F-16s from eight other F-16s while ensuring they were hidden too. So they basically jammed eight radars ! Just how potent is this aircraft ?! Someone please send the answer to turkey loving 'fighter plane designer' Sprey as he was very worried at the time.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 03:38
by castlebravo
Also, I find it interesting that the Dutch are planning to use their F-35A force as fighter escort for F-16 strikers. If you listen to any of the critics out there, you would think that the F-35 is a pure strike aircraft that isn't designed to an air to air mission.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 06:41
by glennwhitten
"The F-35 will never be able to out dogfight a Typhoon in a million years" yet here the F-35 was gunning "clean" F16's while carrying a "bomb" in its internal bomb bay! Sounds like they might have a chance with a Typhoon after all!
"The F-35 will never be able to provide CAS like the A-10"! Yet the F-35 can make digital maps of the battle space and exchanges these maps and videos with ground controllers. Thereby providing quicker and more accurate CAS to ground troops! Yeah the A-10 carries more gun rounds but the F-35 carries more bombs! That's what ground troops want, faster and more accurate (safer) bombs on target!
After expending their bombs they can stay to provide EW assistance to any 4th gen aircraft in the area! Also targeting info to 4th gen aircraft via link 16. Then go back and land vertically at their forward operating base just behind the front line, to refuel, rearm, and do it all again in a fraction of the time it takes other aircraft to return to a landing strip farther behind the front lines! It's a dog alright, TOP DOG!!!

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 09:46
by hornetfinn
What makes F-35 really potent EW system is combination of stealth and SA. They can basically go close to enemy radars while friendly 4th gen aircraft follow them. So distance to radar from jammer is short, but distance from radar to targets is long (called stand-in jamming). This will also keep the jamming power very low and will make it very difficult to for enemy to detect the jamming. Especially so since F-35 can direct very tight jamming beams towards enemy in the frequency band where AN/APG-81 operates.

This is real big difference between legacy support jamming which has pretty much always been done with jamming aircraft standing well back to keep them away from enemy systems (stand-off jamming). This has required a lot of power which is easily detectable by enemy.

F-35 is like a wizard who makes everybody disappear from enemy...

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 11:52
by mk82
Damn!!!!!!!!! More surprises! The F35’s electronic warfare/electronic attack capabilities are much better than I expected (Growler Junior lol). Excellent networking capabilities as expected. A bit cliched but this aircraft (F35) can almost do everything!!!

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 12:04
by mk82
marsavian wrote:
castlebravo wrote:
marsavian wrote:Mimicking a Growler against adversary aircraft ... amazing.


Cooperative EW. If an F-35 can hide an F-16 from other fighters, imagine how hard it is to track an F-35 being protected by another F-35. Now imagine how hard it is for the tiny little seeker head on an active guided missile to track an F-35 being protected by another F-35.


Just two F-35s hid four F-16s from eight other F-16s while ensuring they were hidden too. So they basically jammed eight radars ! Just how potent is this aircraft ?! Someone please send the answer to turkey loving 'fighter plane designer' Sprey as he was very worried at the time.


Lol! We need to send a big fat crow to Pierre Sprey....because he definitely deserves it!! Eat it up!!! It’s terrible being senile/demented.......

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 12:06
by mk82
glennwhitten wrote:"The F-35 will never be able to out dogfight a Typhoon in a million years" yet here the F-35 was gunning "clean" F16's while carrying a "bomb" in its internal bomb bay! Sounds like they might have a chance with a Typhoon after all!
"The F-35 will never be able to provide CAS like the A-10"! Yet the F-35 can make digital maps of the battle space and exchanges these maps and videos with ground controllers. Thereby providing quicker and more accurate CAS to ground troops! Yeah the A-10 carries more gun rounds but the F-35 carries more bombs! That's what ground troops want, faster and more accurate (safer) bombs on target!
After expending their bombs they can stay to provide EW assistance to any 4th gen aircraft in the area! Also targeting info to 4th gen aircraft via link 16. Then go back and land vertically at their forward operating base just behind the front line, to refuel, rearm, and do it all again in a fraction of the time it takes other aircraft to return to a landing strip farther behind the front lines! It's a dog alright, TOP DOG!!!


Spot on!!!

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 12:16
by hornetfinn
mk82 wrote:Damn!!!!!!!!! More surprises! The F35’s electronic warfare/electronic attack capabilities are much better than I expected (Growler Junior lol). Excellent networking capabilities as expected. A bit cliched but this aircraft (F35) can almost do everything!!!


Jack of all trades, master of everything... :D

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 13:07
by mk82
hornetfinn wrote:
mk82 wrote:Damn!!!!!!!!! More surprises! The F35’s electronic warfare/electronic attack capabilities are much better than I expected (Growler Junior lol). Excellent networking capabilities as expected. A bit cliched but this aircraft (F35) can almost do everything!!!


Jack of all trades, master of everything... :D


Took the words out of my mouth!!

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 14:54
by optimist
Remember back in 2012 and the rubbish that the anties were spouting?
This glimmer of light shone through.
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArch ... ighter.pdf
Much speculation has swirled
around the question of the F-35’s
electronic warfare and electronic
attack capabilities. The Air Force
has resolutely refused to discuss
any specifics. Yet experts have
pointed out that, in its most recent
EW/EA roadmap, USAF has
failed to mention any plans for a
dedicated jamming aircraft. It is
a conspicuous omission.

O’Bryan certainly couldn’t go
into the subject of the fighter’s
EW/EA suite in any detail, or
the way it might coordinate with
specialized aircraft such as the
E-3 Airborne Warning and Control
System, RC-135 Rivet Joint, E-8
JSTARS, or EA-18G Growler
jammer aircraft.
He did say, however, that F-35
requirements call for it to go into battle
with “no support whatever” from these
systems

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 15:20
by steve2267
Some additional pertinent quotes from the oldie, but goodie, article to which Optimist referred:
The F-35's Race Against Time
by John A Tirpak, AIR FORCE Magazine, November 2012
...
O’Bryan said the power of the F-35’s EW/EA systems can be inferred from the fact that the Marine Corps “is going to replace its EA-6B [a dedicated jamming aircraft] with the baseline F-35B” with no additional pods or internal systems.
Asked about the Air Force’s plans, O’Bryan answered with several rhetorical questions: “Are they investing in a big jammer fleet? Are they buying [EA-18G] Growlers?” Then he said, “There’s a capability here.”

O’Bryan went on to say that the electronic warfare capability on the F-35A “is as good as, or better than, [that of the] fourth generation airplanes specifically built for that purpose.” The F-35’s “sensitivity” and processing power—a great deal of it automated—coupled with the sensor fusion of internal and offboard systems, give the pilot unprecedented situational aware-
ness as well as the ability to detect, locate, and target specific systems that need to be disrupted.

...
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Documents/2012/November%202012/1112fighter.pdf


The second quote, in red, an oblique reference to Growler?

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 06 Apr 2018, 22:54
by usnvo
steve2267 wrote:Some additional pertinent quotes from the oldie, but goodie, article to which Optimist referred:
The F-35's Race Against Time
by John A Tirpak, AIR FORCE Magazine, November 2012
...
O’Bryan said the power of the F-35’s EW/EA systems can be inferred from the fact that the Marine Corps “is going to replace its EA-6B [a dedicated jamming aircraft] with the baseline F-35B” with no additional pods or internal systems.
Asked about the Air Force’s plans, O’Bryan answered with several rhetorical questions: “Are they investing in a big jammer fleet? Are they buying [EA-18G] Growlers?” Then he said, “There’s a capability here.”

O’Bryan went on to say that the electronic warfare capability on the F-35A “is as good as, or better than, [that of the] fourth generation airplanes specifically built for that purpose.” The F-35’s “sensitivity” and processing power—a great deal of it automated—coupled with the sensor fusion of internal and offboard systems, give the pilot unprecedented situational aware-
ness as well as the ability to detect, locate, and target specific systems that need to be disrupted.

...
http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Documents/2012/November%202012/1112fighter.pdf


The second quote, in red, an oblique reference to Growler?


The real limitation of the F-35 when it comes to electronic attack is the fact that it is largely limited to the frequency range of the APG-81. So jamming F-16 radars (and every other fighter and missile radar) are right in its wheelhouse. Add in the extremely small RCS in that frequency band and you have an awesome self-defense capability as well as the ability to help protect other assets from aircraft and missile attack. However, when you get out of that frequency band, specifically against most any AEW or ground based air search radars, there is no coverage.

This is not to criticize the aircraft, just recognize the limitations. So when someone says "the electronic warfare capability on the F-35A “is as good as, or better than, [that of the] fourth generation airplanes specifically built for that purpose.”" you have to remember that there are very real caveats to that statement.

Having said that, it is hilarious to read all the comments of people (Stealth is Dead because the F-35 can be detected!) who can't seem to understand what a massive advantage just being able to own the X-Band is. Look at the scenario in question, 8 F-16 defending against 4 F-16s and 2 F-35s. Even with a AEW or GCI radar that could actually detect the F-35 (although it should be noted that a real enemy force would have no way to know that two F-35 were there until they had already reacted to the 4 F-16s, talk about ambush possibilities), the F-16/F-35 force gets first detection, first shots (and probably second shots as well) before the OPFOR F-16s even get a chance to engage.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 00:09
by kimjongnumbaun
usnvo wrote:[

The real limitation of the F-35 when it comes to electronic attack is the fact that it is largely limited to the frequency range of the APG-81. So jamming F-16 radars (and every other fighter and missile radar) are right in its wheelhouse. Add in the extremely small RCS in that frequency band and you have an awesome self-defense capability as well as the ability to help protect other assets from aircraft and missile attack. However, when you get out of that frequency band, specifically against most any AEW or ground based air search radars, there is no coverage.

This is not to criticize the aircraft, just recognize the limitations. So when someone says "the electronic warfare capability on the F-35A “is as good as, or better than, [that of the] fourth generation airplanes specifically built for that purpose.”" you have to remember that there are very real caveats to that statement.

Having said that, it is hilarious to read all the comments of people (Stealth is Dead because the F-35 can be detected!) who can't seem to understand what a massive advantage just being able to own the X-Band is. Look at the scenario in question, 8 F-16 defending against 4 F-16s and 2 F-35s. Even with a AEW or GCI radar that could actually detect the F-35 (although it should be noted that a real enemy force would have no way to know that two F-35 were there until they had already reacted to the 4 F-16s, talk about ambush possibilities), the F-16/F-35 force gets first detection, first shots (and probably second shots as well) before the OPFOR F-16s even get a chance to engage.


The F-35 also carries the AN/ASQ-239.

"Always active, AN/ASQ-239 provides all-aspect, broadband protection, allowing the F-35 to reach well-defended targets and suppress enemy radars."

https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/produc ... ure-system

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 00:16
by vilters
Ja, ja, but whatever you can hang on Jet A can also be hung on Jet B.

We are talking about "integrated Jamming possibilities.

And?....
Jamming is not so good at all. A "Jammer" is emitting, so increasing it's signature that can be found by other means.

TRUE Stealth is : Keep your mouths shut and EVERYTHING OFF.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 01:42
by optimist
You both may be right and the US is so silly and are clueless about EW/EA, including ground radar. Some would say you are wrong.
kimjongnumbaun video from link

and you may have forgotten back in 2009
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIwAOupjMeM&t=

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 05:31
by glennwhitten
LM likes to say the only way to make an aircraft stealthy is to build it in from the beginning. Strictly true, but the best way to make an F-16 disappear is to have it accompanied by an F-35! Say a country has a CAP of 4 SU-35's. They detect 4 inbound F-16's. They then move to intercept, but on the way there, the F16's disappear from radar, shortly before the Su-35 are blown from the sky by the F-16's AND the accompanying F-35s!!

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 05:33
by element1loop
usnvo wrote:The real limitation of the F-35 when it comes to electronic attack is the fact that it is largely limited to the frequency range of the APG-81. So jamming F-16 radars (and every other fighter and missile radar) are right in its wheelhouse. Add in the extremely small RCS in that frequency band and you have an awesome self-defense capability as well as the ability to help protect other assets from aircraft and missile attack. However, when you get out of that frequency band, specifically against most any AEW or ground based air search radars, there is no coverage.

This is not to criticize the aircraft, just recognize the limitations. So when someone says "the electronic warfare capability on the F-35A “is as good as, or better than, [that of the] fourth generation airplanes specifically built for that purpose.”" you have to remember that there are very real caveats to that statement.

Having said that, it is hilarious to read all the comments of people (Stealth is Dead because the F-35 can be detected!) who can't seem to understand what a massive advantage just being able to own the X-Band is.


Thank you, quite agree. Growler is intended as a STRATEGIC support jammer. What it is now is very far from what it will become, by 2025 to 2030 timeframe.

Digital NGJ long-wave = counter HF OTHR (enables VLO)

Digital NGJ medium-wave = counter VHF EWR & multistatic

Digital NGJ short-wave = counter LOS UHF anything.


USAF Generals may say they dont want Growler anywhere near their F-35A, OK, sure, but it will be Growlers that get them into targets unseen by EWRs, and make opfor GCI non-viable, and allow B-21 to approach or loiter, undetected.

You have to make sure you can strangle all EMS frequencies, to enable VLO to work at high-intensity end.

Right now JORN OTHR is under going its Phase-6 upgrade which involves comprehensive re-design and re-building of the whole network.

But why? If it already works effectively against F-117A, and B-2?

So that it can routinely detect and track J20 stealth aircraft, within the first-bounce region (to within about 3,500 km of the mainland). Plus to decentralise the network and make it more survivable and degrade gracefully in combat.

You'd need a sizeable fleet of Growler NGJ to be able to temporarily locally degrade even the current sensor network enough to attack unseen through it, as even the currect (overlapping triangulating steerable output) sensor network is capable of over 1.65 million watts output within the first-bounce region.

And much freakout around about king-hit hype-missiles taking out fleet units, easy-peasy, etc., but good luck targeting them if Growler NGJ has the theatre's electromagnetic spectrum by the throat. It's not going to be so easy.

No point comparing F-35 to Growler---grapes verses water-mellons.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 05:41
by element1loop
vilters wrote:TRUE Stealth is : Keep your mouths shut and EVERYTHING OFF.


Which won't work at all against HF band, until HF band VLO is developed and fielded.

Maybe on B-21, then PCA.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 07:04
by popcorn
That could be quite a frequency spread, only the Shadow knows.

usnvo wrote:...The real limitation of the F-35 when it comes to electronic attack is the fact that it is largely limited to the frequency range of the APG-81.



https://patents.google.com/patent/US4823136

The transmit-receive cells are fully functional at broadband and narrow band radio frequencies. In the narrow band of 9.2 to 10.2 GHz, the active antenna system would operate as a radar system. In the broadband range of 2.0 GHz to 20.0 GHz the active antenna system is fully functional in electronic countermeasures and radio frequency jamming. Either application would find a place on an advanced aircraft or space based sensor systems because of weight and size restrictions.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 07:29
by SpudmanWP
So.. between L/S and K.. not bad. Too bad we'll never know what's in the APG-81. :roll:


Image

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 07:50
by popcorn
Makes me wonder what frequencies MALD-X will focus on.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 10:49
by element1loop
popcorn wrote:https://patents.google.com/patent/US4823136

The transmit-receive cells are fully functional at broadband and narrow band radio frequencies. In the narrow band of 9.2 to 10.2 GHz, the active antenna system would operate as a radar system. In the broadband range of 2.0 GHz to 20.0 GHz the active antenna system is fully functional in electronic countermeasures and radio frequency jamming. Either application would find a place on an advanced aircraft or space based sensor systems because of weight and size restrictions.


So, this is ESM plus integral passive target detection and locating via phase, plus ECM active phase cancellation re-emission 'jamming', within one system for the whole frequency range?


"... 8. An improved phased-array active antenna system, as in claim 4 wherein said antenna means is a dual horn antenna operable in said broad band range to selectively receive enemy radar transmissions and respond with a cross polarized radio frequency signal of sufficient polarization to jam said enemy radar system.
...
10. A transmit-receive means operable for use in an active, phased array antenna system to transmit or receive a multiplicity of individually phase-shifted radio frequency signals, comprising: ... "


So whatever it hears and classifies as an ACTIVE detector it will automatically re-emit a phase-cancelled mirror signal to reduce gain of return (i.e. after VLO aspect gain attenuations that is)?

And whatever it PASSIVELY hears is recorded, classified and located by phase shifting and triangulation, feed into fused picture?

bugga!

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 10:54
by element1loop
popcorn wrote:Makes me wonder what frequencies MALD-X will focus on.


Wouldn't it make sense to use those to defeat VHF on the way in?

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 07 Apr 2018, 20:05
by wrightwing
hornetfinn wrote: Especially so since F-35 can direct very tight jamming beams towards enemy in the frequency band where AN/APG-81 operates.


That's not even including the electronic trickery of the ASQ-239, and ALE-70.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 08 Apr 2018, 00:26
by vanshilar
popcorn wrote:Makes me wonder what frequencies MALD-X will focus on.


Whenever I think of decoys for stealth fighters I think of an F-35 towing a steel marble on a long piece of string.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 08 Apr 2018, 01:11
by popcorn
wrightwing wrote:
hornetfinn wrote: Especially so since F-35 can direct very tight jamming beams towards enemy in the frequency band where AN/APG-81 operates.


That's not even including the electronic trickery of the ASQ-239, and ALE-70.


The synergy arising from networked collaborative F-35 EW takes it to the next level.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 06:58
by hornetfinn
popcorn wrote:That could be quite a frequency spread, only the Shadow knows.

usnvo wrote:...The real limitation of the F-35 when it comes to electronic attack is the fact that it is largely limited to the frequency range of the APG-81.



https://patents.google.com/patent/US4823136

The transmit-receive cells are fully functional at broadband and narrow band radio frequencies. In the narrow band of 9.2 to 10.2 GHz, the active antenna system would operate as a radar system. In the broadband range of 2.0 GHz to 20.0 GHz the active antenna system is fully functional in electronic countermeasures and radio frequency jamming. Either application would find a place on an advanced aircraft or space based sensor systems because of weight and size restrictions.


Yes, that's one common misconception that AESA systems are restricted to X-band only also when used for EW. GaAs systems are pretty much restricted to X-band when operating as radar, but as EW systems the frequency range can be significantly wider. Only the output power levels are likely reduced. Of course EW systems generally have far lower output power levels than radar systems in legacy aircraft. Future GaN modules can have much wider bandwidth coverage without sacrificing output power. Future GaN AESA systems will likely have really incredible jamming capabilities.

Good find, btw. That was what was state-of-the-art 30 years ago. Just imagine what can be done today... :D

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 08:56
by zero-one
vilters wrote:TRUE Stealth is : Keep your mouths shut and EVERYTHING OFF.



I'm curious about this, its been thrown around quite a while now by a few people here.
But my question is, has it been done before?

And if not? why not?
"They simply never thought about it" or, "they are still using 4th gen tactics"
doesn't seem like a fitting reason to be honest.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 09:12
by popcorn
hornetfinn wrote:[
Good find, btw. That was what was state-of-the-art 30 years ago. Just imagine what can be done today... :D


Can't take the credit hornetfinn, just citing the patent link you originally posted back in the day. :mrgreen:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 09:15
by hornetfinn
popcorn wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:[
Good find, btw. That was what was state-of-the-art 30 years ago. Just imagine what can be done today... :D


Can't take the credit hornetfinn, just citing the patent link you originally posted back in the day. :mrgreen:


LOL! :D

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 12:21
by Dragon029
zero-one wrote:
vilters wrote:TRUE Stealth is : Keep your mouths shut and EVERYTHING OFF.



I'm curious about this, its been thrown around quite a while now by a few people here.
But my question is, has it been done before?

And if not? why not?
"They simply never thought about it" or, "they are still using 4th gen tactics"
doesn't seem like a fitting reason to be honest.


As I understand it, Vilters was talking about not emitting (ie not even trying to jam enemy radar) in order to avoid detection; that's how the F-117 operated (even if it sometimes had EW support, it itself didn't emit anything when operating over the enemy). The F-22 and F-35 would likely have tried out 100% EMCOM at times as well, though (for the Raptor) maybe not over Syria.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 16:18
by zero-one
Thanks Dragon

F-35 sits somewhere in between the F-16 and F/A-18 when it comes to within visual range maneuvering.


Regarding the pilot's statements above,

1. Call me paranoid but critics can spin this into something to the effect of "not as good as an F-16 and not as good as an F/A-18" But the way I understand it is, the F-35 can do everything the 18 can while very closely matching the F-16 in most of it's strengths.

In fact, its better than both when loaded for combat. So I guess a better analogy is, "its an F/A-18 with F-16 like power"

2. The F-35 is not the first Western high alpha capable plane with brute power. The F-22 was first. does the Raptor loose as much or maybe even more energy at high alpha (due to larger wings) than the F-35, or does it simply plow through all that head wind. I mean, its not called the most powerful fighter ever built for no reason.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 16:59
by marsavian
The way I read that quote was when clean ...

Turn Rate performance = F-16 > F-35 > F-18
High Alpha performance = F-18 > F-35 > F-16

You can see that the F-35 has enough all round ability to dogfight with any opponent if it has to but of course its primary strength is its stealth/SA which usually will mean dogfighting is an optional extra in the majority of its missions ;). Contrary to what its critics have claimed over the years LMT delivered to spec on all major criteria.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 17:18
by zero-one
marsavian wrote:The way I read that quote was when clean ...

Turn Rate performance = F-16 > F-35 > F-18
High Alpha performance = F-18 > F-35 > F-16


See thats my problem, I agree with the Turn rate performance though I think the F-35 may even have the advantage over the F-16 at certain altitudes, air speeds or fuel loads.

But with the high Alpha, I don't see why the F/A-18 is superior? is it because the F-35 CLAWS limit it to just 50 degrees?
I've never seen the limit for the Hornet or Rhino is it greater than 50? if it is then I understand why you gave it an edge in high alpha

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 17:28
by wrightwing
marsavian wrote:The way I read that quote was when clean ...

Turn Rate performance = F-16 > F-35 > F-18
High Alpha performance = F-18 > F-35 > F-16

You can see that the F-35 has enough all round ability to dogfight with any opponent if it has to but of course its primary strength is its stealth/SA which usually will mean dogfighting is an optional extra in the majority of its missions ;). Contrary to what its critics have claimed over the years LMT delivered to spec on all major criteria.

If you read that quote along with numerous other quotes, which provide further context, that's not what's being said. There are numerous examples of pilots saying rates like F-16, radiuses like F-18, or in other cases pilots have suggested superior kinematics to 4th generation aircraft in general (to include Typhoon, Rafale, and Gripen.) Whatever the case may be, the F-35 is a challenging WVR foe for any aircraft, but its greatest strengths are situational awareness/information superiority.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 17:54
by zero-one
wrightwing wrote: Whatever the case may be, the F-35 is a challenging WVR foe for any aircraft, but its greatest strengths are situational awareness/information superiority.


Very true, but this one gets the most attention because it was one of the biggest criticisms that turned out to be flat out wrong.

Also, Situational Awareness and info gathering is upgraded, just look at how far the S.A of a current block 60 F-16 is to a block 40 (some of which are still in service). the difference is a world apart.

but the performance of the latest F-16 today to how it was in 1980s is still quite similar. So there is a sense that, if you're only advantage is S.A. then others will eventually catch up, but if you're slow and sluggish, theres no way you can catch up.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 17:55
by steve2267
Here is a Lightning driver's response to my question(s):

As for your question-yes the aircraft is a mix between the two aircraft for maneuverability. It has the energy addition of an f-16 and rates like a viper as well. However, it has the high aoa ability and radius of an f-18. A slick block 50 viper in an airshow config may outrate you a bit but you have the radius and aoa to beat him as well as power to match. A slick hornet may have a better radius by a bit but you can outrate him. You are better than all of those jets with ordnance regardless of the fight. The yaw rate is pretty eye opening. There are definitely advantages using the pedal turn but it’s definitely not a magic move. Has to be used at the right time and place, otherwise you’re setting yourself up to get beat due to a lack of energy. You can’t snap a pedal turn on at 350 kts, you have to be slower.


He said he was a former Hornet driver, and has Viper and Rhino time as well. Seems pretty self-explanatory to me. It also, IMO, shows why the Viper drivers in the original PDF article went from two wing tanks, to a single centerline tank, and finally ended up trying to fly slick against the Lightnings. Sounds like the Lightning drivers had answers for all the moves once they had learned how to fight the jet.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 18:05
by spazsinbad
:devil: "...Lighting drivers..."??? Yep I can see those BULBs working overtime. :doh: FUXed Now! :mrgreen:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2018, 19:27
by steve2267
I dunno what yers going on about... :shrug: :doh:

Fixed... :crazypilot:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 00:43
by usnvo
hornetfinn wrote:
popcorn wrote:That could be quite a frequency spread, only the Shadow knows.

usnvo wrote:...The real limitation of the F-35 when it comes to electronic attack is the fact that it is largely limited to the frequency range of the APG-81.



https://patents.google.com/patent/US4823136

The transmit-receive cells are fully functional at broadband and narrow band radio frequencies. In the narrow band of 9.2 to 10.2 GHz, the active antenna system would operate as a radar system. In the broadband range of 2.0 GHz to 20.0 GHz the active antenna system is fully functional in electronic countermeasures and radio frequency jamming. Either application would find a place on an advanced aircraft or space based sensor systems because of weight and size restrictions.


Yes, that's one common misconception that AESA systems are restricted to X-band only also when used for EW. GaAs systems are pretty much restricted to X-band when operating as radar, but as EW systems the frequency range can be significantly wider. Only the output power levels are likely reduced. Of course EW systems generally have far lower output power levels than radar systems in legacy aircraft. Future GaN modules can have much wider bandwidth coverage without sacrificing output power. Future GaN AESA systems will likely have really incredible jamming capabilities.

Good find, btw. That was what was state-of-the-art 30 years ago. Just imagine what can be done today... :D


While that may be true (although I note it is a patent application and not a production radar specifications so the actual capability of the APG-81 is still in question) it doesn't change the basic fact that is still above the
frequency bands of AEW and early warning radars, especially 2D ones.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 07:13
by hornetfinn
usnvo wrote:While that may be true (although I note it is a patent application and not a production radar specifications so the actual capability of the APG-81 is still in question) it doesn't change the basic fact that is still above the
frequency bands of AEW and early warning radars, especially 2D ones.


Sure and there is definitely reason to have systems like Growler and/or NGJ against them. Of course those low band radars are very large, expensive and low in numbers. They can only provide early warning and direct higher frequency radars and thus are less dangerous. Of course F-35 EW suite should be able to detect them and know their effective Most threatening radars operate in frequencies where F-35 EW system is likely effective.

True that it was a patent application, but those are not made just for fun. That was 30 years ago and AESA technology has evolved immensely during that time. They realised that narrowband radar and wideband EW functions can be done with single system even with technology at the time and made a patent application for that. Of course radar requires a lot of power and EW systems generally require a very wide bandwidth. However increasing power is difficult without narrowing bandwidth as is widening bandwidth without lowering power. I bet that AN/APG-81 has the best performance in X-band and likely jamming power will get lower as frequency gets lower. What the limits are is really difficult to say and I'm sure we'll likely never get definitive answer to that.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 08:44
by element1loop
hornetfinn wrote: ...and likely jamming power will get lower as frequency gets lower. What the limits are is really difficult to say and I'm sure we'll likely never get definitive answer to that.


But even at 2 gigahertz the illumination should be relatively easy to jam/mask, if maintaining adequate radial distance---inverse-square law and all.

" ...The inverse-square law, in physics, is any physical law stating that a specified physical quantity or intensity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the source of that physical quantity. The fundamental cause for this can be understood as geometric dilution corresponding to point-source radiation into three-dimensional space (see diagram).

Radar energy expands during both the signal transmission and also on the reflected return, so the inverse square for both paths means that the radar will receive energy according to the inverse fourth power of the range. ..."


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:In ... re_law.svg

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law


Thus you don't need a lot of radial distance increase to make EW jam-masking effective as jamming power decreases. i.e. MDF could inform the pilot of what radial distance they need for masking to be effective.

The real vulnerabity will be at longer than 10 centimeter wavelengths. Hence EW decoys (MALD).

Seems to me there's no reason directional UHF to VHF MALD-type masking tech could not also be integrated on the F-35 too, from the outset.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 08:50
by zero-one
steve2267 wrote:Here is a Lightning driver's response to my question(s):

As for your question-yes the aircraft is a mix between the two aircraft for maneuverability. It has the energy addition of an f-16 and rates like a viper as well. However, it has the high aoa ability and radius of an f-18. A slick block 50 viper in an airshow config may outrate you a bit but you have the radius and aoa to beat him as well as power to match. A slick hornet may have a better radius by a bit but you can outrate him. You are better than all of those jets with ordnance regardless of the fight. The yaw rate is pretty eye opening. There are definitely advantages using the pedal turn but it’s definitely not a magic move. Has to be used at the right time and place, otherwise you’re setting yourself up to get beat due to a lack of energy. You can’t snap a pedal turn on at 350 kts, you have to be slower.


This is awesome Steve,

Can you ask him if he can share some DACT stories, I noticed that Tomcat, Eagle, Viper, Hornet and Rhino pilots have no problem sharing their DACT experiences.

But Raptor and Lightning pilots are pretty reserved? Curious, we know that WVR combat is something that they will rarely experience and is actually not their primary strength even if they are better at it than anyone else.

So why all this mystery on how they conduct BFM?

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 09:07
by spazsinbad
"...So why all this mystery on how they conduct BFM?" For a start USAF recently started a long pause in PR spokepeeps for OPsec reasons. Ya reckon F-35/F-22 pilots are involved in that? How about NON USAF F-35 pilots? Hence article above at top of first page that started this thread. Sheesh. viewtopic.php?f=58&t=53958&p=390664#p390664

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 09:53
by hornetfinn
spazsinbad wrote:How about NON USAF F-35 pilots?


Like Morten Hanche, the Norwegian F-35 pilot who has described the performance in many occasions. He has a lot of experience with F-16 and also some with Hornets. Those quotes can be easily found here. Like the "turbo engined Hornet". Here is a good one:

Overall I can say that a stripped-down F-16 has slightly better sustained turn rate than the F-35. However, an F-35 has the advantage with regards to getting inside the turn of its opponent. In a dogfight between the F-16 and the F-35 they will therefore both have strengths to play on.


Of course there is also this:
So how does this apply in the case of an engagement between the F-16 and the F-35? It depends, and it particularly depends on how the F-16 is loaded. A stripped-down F-16 is a formidable opponent to anyone in BFM. However, this changes quickly when we dress the F-16 up for combat. If we are to compare the F-16 and F-35 on an equal basis, we must assume that the F-16 will be carrying both external fuel, a «jamming pod» for electronic warfare, weapon mounts for bombs, missiles and a camera pod for target acquisition and illumination. With this loadout, the F-16´s performance is significantly reduced: The maximum angle of attack is reduced by 40% (the ability to move the nose away from the direction of travel), the roll rate is lowered, the maximum allowable airspeed is reduced and the g-limitations are stricter.


People don't seem to get that fighter aircraft need fuel, weapons, targeting pods and pylons to go into combat. With F-35 all or most of that is internal and doesn't affect performance much if at all. In 4th gen aircraft the effect is much bigger as most of the stuff is external. It really doesn't matter what the performance is when slick as no aircraft is going to combat in that configuration.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 10:14
by spazsinbad
Yes Euro English speakin' F-35 pilotes are a blessing (OK I'll include RAF crabs) for knowledge of flying qualities of the F-35. Heck I'll even include test pilots of the ilk of that CANUCKian goggle-eyed chap whathisname. There are lots of OLD quotes from 'merican pilotes but who's lookin'. This forum is filled with good quotes about the good F-35 but peeps only remember that one test pilot report from yonks ago. I can sigh all I want but whatever - obviously the F-35 is a BEAST! :mrgreen:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 13:00
by hornetfinn
Besides, I don't get the fascination with one-on-one gunfights. In real life it's likely very rare for on-on-one gunfight to happen especially with modern fighters. Even one-on-one dogfight with missiles is rather rare. It's usually many-vs-many situation where superior long-range SA is the key for gaining initial advantage. This is where stealth, sensors, sensor fusion, networking and EW are the key and this is where F-35 excels at.

Of course even in realistic WVR situation the superior SA is great thing to have. F-35 is bristling with sensors and sensor fusion to constantly have great SA about the situation. For example 4-vs-4 furball is likely very difficult for human to constantly know exactly where friendlies and enemies are. F-35 sensors and sensor fusion will know this constantly and in all conditions with high degree of probability (of course nothing is perfect). Then stealth is going to make it more difficult for enemy sensors and missiles to target and hit F-35 especially given all the self defence systems in F-35. I think this is something not really modeled in air combat training.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 13:41
by spazsinbad
Yeah but all these comments just go round in circles on and on much like a stalemate dogfight (usual same aircraft - not DACT) until someone does something stupid. So the same comments about dogfighting go round and round until someone says something stupid (does this qualify?) and then we stop. I hope. But I'll sigh and sigh again and again because.... :drool:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 15:57
by zero-one
spazsinbad wrote:"Ya reckon F-35/F-22 pilots are involved in that?


wah A ges the F-15 and F-16 piluts didn't get the memo huh.

anyway, it could be that. I'm just curious on how Tailgate can openly share his F-15 tactics but when asked about the Raptor its just....."well I can't talk too much about it....but I'm telling you its awesome".

I'm not saying he should say anything, if its Opsec then its better kept. All I'm saying is, they're obviously keeping something...thats all, I don't need to know what it is, but they're keeping it, that much I'm sure.

Lets see why is everyone talking dogfights?
Because it's cool,

an E2D can share more data, the new airforce one probably runs more lines of code a Burke class destroyer is better BVR platform. but nobody talks about it. at least not that much.

basketball is a team sport, but everyone talks about LeBron vs KD or Curry vs Kyrie, etc etc. one on one is cool and you can't stop people talking about it no matter how unlikely it is.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 16:37
by steve2267
Thinking some more about the quote i just posted, I note that the LD did not say anything new -- there were no new revelations. All that he stated is out there in the public domain in one way or another. Whether it be quotes or tweets from Berke, quotes from LM test pilots, esp. Billie Flynn, or articles by Dolbe Hanche.

The Viper is still regarded as a fearsome BFM machine when stripped slick, said to be the equal of the Typhoon up to 10K (or is it 15K?) feet altitude, but doesn't have low speed / high nose chops. The Hornet is regarded as being exceptionally dangerous because of its high alpha nose pointing capability, but somewhat of a dog once it has bled away its energy (i.e. the F/A-18 platform does not regain or hold energy terribly well). If those two are still respected, are still dangerous in their respective areas of strength, how much more dangerous is the F-35 if it combines the strengths of both, adds incredible sensors + sensor fusion (= incredible SA), carries gobs of gas, oh yeah, and you can't target it with your "normal" sensors?

Maybe the "nickname" for the F-35 should be savante, as it is the idiot savante of the tactical aviation world -- doing everything better than everyone else without even trying -- effortlessly.

Oh, want to play the rate game? Ok, I can hang with you there, or maybe I'll just kill my speed (bleed off a hundred knots) -- out radius / turn inside you -- and kill you now. Hanche made specific note in one of his blogs how quickly the F-35 bleeds speed -- stops faster than the family car is what I think he said. But there are no airbrakes sticking out there like an F-15 or F-16. I wonder if the visual signature that an F-35 has put on the brakes is rather subdued -- not very telling to enema pilots. Might that delayed recognition be a few more seconds in the Lightning driver's fight ledger?

But former Hornet pilots rave about four engines, or "a turbo". Viper pilots compare it to a Block 50 Viper (possibly with a single centerline tank) in terms of acceleration. One of the first comments from a new Lightning pilot is almost invariably about how much power the engine has. So the Lightning driver can re-gain that lost energy PDQ (pretty darn quick for you non-merics) as (s)he needs.

I keep recalling Billie Flynn's comment about overlaying the E-M diagram of the F-35 on top of any 4th gen fighter and the F-35 is better. The press had a field day with that quote. No one believed him. The haters went bonkers. But more and more, a quote here, a tidbit there... I think that Flynn was absolutely truthful. The Viper pilot who flew against Lt Col Gunn (viewtopic.php?p=383045#p383045) a 2nd time and was amazed at the F-35 performance the second time. The Vipers starting with two EFTs, dropping them for a single centerline, then flying slick in this current article.

I marvel at how LM achieved the performance they have in the F-35. It truly appears to be cutting edge in every way. IMO, the F-35 is the logical evolution of the F-16: take an F-16, stuff all the fuel it will need inside, plus stuff two AIM-120's, two 1-ton bombs inside, slather on stealth, give it twin tails (stealth + high alpha), oh, and make it land like a Harrier, only easier (and don't forget all those electronic doodaad pilot aids to make A-7 pilots swoon)... the F-35 has got to be about the smallest platform that would achieve all that.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 17:15
by zero-one
exactly, I often think of the JSF concept phase to go something like this:

Airforce: We want a stealth F-16 and we don't want to hang all kinds of pods and EFTs on it but we want it to go as far as if it had 3 tanks and maneuver as if it had no tanks.

LM: We can do that,
*takes an F-16, integrates all sensors inside. increases wing area by ~60%, increases thrust output by ~60% and increases fuel by 250%

Navy: but we want hornet like high alpha

LM: *adds 2 tails
"happy now?"

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 17:22
by steve2267
I will be interested to read quotes, blurbs, or stories from Killer Bee pilots regarding DACT BFM over time. Many people regard the Aye model as the air-to-air beast of the flock, though some point to the better turn performance of the Cee (though we have yet to see numbers). After all... how can a 7g F-35B possibly compare to the 9g F-35A?

I think that all goes to how you fight the jet. Will Lt Studly honk the F-35A all over the sky at 9g all the time to win his BFM bragging rights? Or will Major Benthar relax a bit back to 7g and find that to be the "sweet spot" for most BFM maneuvers? If so, then the Killer Bee should be pretty much just as lethal.

Two other notes: Dolby Hanche commented about how quickly the F-35 slows down, and how important that can be. He described having little trouble "sticking like glue" on other aircraft -- so it sounds like saddling up was "easy" for him. Secondly, from an F-16 E-M diagram, 9g at about 0.8 Mach (460 kts-ish?) yields 18.5°/sec turn rate. But at 0.6 Mach (340 kts-ish?), 6.3g yields 17.5°/sec. (For reference: download/file.php?id=26968&mode=view). My point being that a 7g F-35B may very well "essentially rate with" an F-16 by flying slightly slower.

The ace in the F-35's hand, though, appears to be that the pilot can knock off another 50-100 knots and slice inside the other guy's turn (out radius him). As QS noted elsewhere, radius also kills. And he's got the smash to get his speed back toot suite.

Of course, these words are just the ramblings of an old aero engineer with no BFM experience, but who sees hints of spectacular ("eye watering") performance in quotes here and there.

It was fun to read Knight's comments about the adversary aircraft stripping down clean to try to avoid "getting gunned" by us. Sounds like "no kill like a gun kill" is still at play. I look forward to future snippets and stories of F-35 BFM prowess. If I get any, and am free to share, I will to be sure.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 17:27
by steve2267
zero-one wrote:exactly, I often think of the JSF concept phase to go something like this:

Airforce: We want a stealth F-16 and we don't want to hang all kinds of pods and EFTs on it but we want it to go as far as if it had 3 tanks and maneuver as if it had no tanks.

LM: We can do that,
*takes an F-16, integrates all sensors inside. increases wing area by ~60%, increases thrust output by ~60% and increases fuel by 250%

Navy: but we want hornet like high alpha

LM: *adds 2 tails
"happy now?"


A minor nit -- I will note that the F-117 and F-22 both had twin tails. So I think the "stealth" part required the two tails. JohnWill noted one F-16 concept from the late 60's early 70's was a canted, twin tail, single engine design. So my slight alteration:

Marines: but it has to land like a Harrier

LM: tosses in a lift fan

Navy: but we want hornet-like nose pointing and really slow, stable approach speed.

LM: slightly increases tail size, increases wing area
"happy now?"
:mrgreen:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 17:32
by zero-one
Good one.

I also want to point out that the empty wing loading figure of the F-16C and F-35A are exactly the same at 63 lbs /sq feet. That tells me that the viper was cleaely some sort of template

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 17:38
by wrightwing
zero-one wrote:
wrightwing wrote: Whatever the case may be, the F-35 is a challenging WVR foe for any aircraft, but its greatest strengths are situational awareness/information superiority.


Very true, but this one gets the most attention because it was one of the biggest criticisms that turned out to be flat out wrong.

Also, Situational Awareness and info gathering is upgraded, just look at how far the S.A of a current block 60 F-16 is to a block 40 (some of which are still in service). the difference is a world apart.

but the performance of the latest F-16 today to how it was in 1980s is still quite similar. So there is a sense that, if you're only advantage is S.A. then others will eventually catch up, but if you're slow and sluggish, theres no way you can catch up.


Fortunately LM in their foresight, didn't design the F-35 in such a manner, where SA, was its only advantage. It has kinematic, SA, stealth, EA/EA, spherical engagement, range, payload, etc.... advantages.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 10 Apr 2018, 21:23
by usnvo
hornetfinn wrote:
usnvo wrote:While that may be true (although I note it is a patent application and not a production radar specifications so the actual capability of the APG-81 is still in question) it doesn't change the basic fact that is still above the
frequency bands of AEW and early warning radars, especially 2D ones.


Sure and there is definitely reason to have systems like Growler and/or NGJ against them. Of course those low band radars are very large, expensive and low in numbers. They can only provide early warning and direct higher frequency radars and thus are less dangerous. Of course F-35 EW suite should be able to detect them and know their effective Most threatening radars operate in frequencies where F-35 EW system is likely effective.

True that it was a patent application, but those are not made just for fun. That was 30 years ago and AESA technology has evolved immensely during that time. They realised that narrowband radar and wideband EW functions can be done with single system even with technology at the time and made a patent application for that. Of course radar requires a lot of power and EW systems generally require a very wide bandwidth. However increasing power is difficult without narrowing bandwidth as is widening bandwidth without lowering power. I bet that AN/APG-81 has the best performance in X-band and likely jamming power will get lower as frequency gets lower. What the limits are is really difficult to say and I'm sure we'll likely never get definitive answer to that.


Well, you have an entirely different understanding of patent applications than I do. This was not only not state of the art 30 years ago, it was by definition future stuff or they wouldn't have patented it. It may not have been achievable by engineering 30 years ago and may not be achievable now. That is how patents work. Until you see what the state of the art is today, we don't know if that was a pipe dream or a reasonable way to proceed that was adopted.

The APG-81 definitely has more powerful jamming in X band for no other reason that the beam width and side lobes will increase immensely, decreasing power density, as you move away from the base frequency. That will also make your jamming much easier to detect and track.

I agree with your statement of search radars which just strengthens my point that even if you are visible to the low frequency air search radars, having control of the X-band, where all the targeting radars, airborne radars, and missile radars are, gives you a dramatic advantage. Imagine the AIC discussion with the 8 F-16s in their example, "Roger, six bandits inbound, buster 235 for 135, be advised they will get a couple of shots off before you can even detect them, hope that's not a problem".

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 01:08
by element1loop
Given the first priority of attack is to use standoff D-SEAD weapons to knock the EWR radars down, in a high-intensity penetration fight as prepatory to bombardment proper, seems the combo of VLO, MDF-cued EW/ECM, stealth tactics, and especially radial-distance management, are all you need to get that done.

Therefore masking with EMS trickery is to manage a popup's effectiveness, before they are (shortly) killed. Do we think A2A popups are likely to sneak past a network of wide-open 'formations' of 5th-gen sensors, fused? Nope.

So the electronic masking is mostly about making VLO work better, especially against SAMs, until you adjust your radual distance. As you've pointed out, engagement via X-band radar is likely to get the SAM D-SEAD quick, or to put it defensive quick, as you increase F-35s radial distance to SAM, where upon you let standoff weapons take the risks for you, on an auto-geolicated and ISR-ed and classified SAM. Shoot and scoot is out for it, as it will be seen, tracked and killed.

With the 4th-gen situation, if you got shot at by a prior undetected radar SAM, you had to get out of its engagement range fast, while dodging SAMs, generallg freaking out and getting exhausted plus lower energy and fuel through high-Gs. So SA and radial distance was and is the natural solution.

But that's not the same case now, given the quality of F-35 sensor fusion, MADL, SA, MDF-cues, and auto-geolocating. Yes, the SAM launchers may be distributed, widely, every way you turn, but Is not the F-35 now much more a danger to a SAM radar popup than the SAM system is to the F-35? And can the radar(s) see you every way you turn? And is OPFOR going to risk all its SAM system's radars in one ambush action? Not very likely.

So if you have almost immediate SA, precision geolocation and classification, you can also almost immediately fire a weapon at the SAM popup---first. Even if it's the slammer you use to put it defensive, as you either go for higher radius, or eliminate other parts of the SAM with your other weapons.

Maybe it's a soft mission-kill for one F-35, but the SAM radar is dead, and the other missions succeed and survive.

Far better to be an aggressive SAM killer than a spooked target.

Auto jam-masking does its job, and a system of systems completely altered the 4th-gen's dynamic, eliminating the advantage of the popup, and permits fast aggressive killing of popups.

Totally reverses the popup's prior ambush advantages.

So, in a battle context, the EW/ECM is one of the incidental automated tools for the pilot to manage with good tactics and weapons, using MDF-guided cueing, plus all-seeing SA displayed within helmet-view, as pilot immediately goes agro to prosecute the popup.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 11 Apr 2018, 11:04
by hornetfinn
usnvo wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:
usnvo wrote:While that may be true (although I note it is a patent application and not a production radar specifications so the actual capability of the APG-81 is still in question) it doesn't change the basic fact that is still above the
frequency bands of AEW and early warning radars, especially 2D ones.


Sure and there is definitely reason to have systems like Growler and/or NGJ against them. Of course those low band radars are very large, expensive and low in numbers. They can only provide early warning and direct higher frequency radars and thus are less dangerous. Of course F-35 EW suite should be able to detect them and know their effective Most threatening radars operate in frequencies where F-35 EW system is likely effective.

True that it was a patent application, but those are not made just for fun. That was 30 years ago and AESA technology has evolved immensely during that time. They realised that narrowband radar and wideband EW functions can be done with single system even with technology at the time and made a patent application for that. Of course radar requires a lot of power and EW systems generally require a very wide bandwidth. However increasing power is difficult without narrowing bandwidth as is widening bandwidth without lowering power. I bet that AN/APG-81 has the best performance in X-band and likely jamming power will get lower as frequency gets lower. What the limits are is really difficult to say and I'm sure we'll likely never get definitive answer to that.


Well, you have an entirely different understanding of patent applications than I do. This was not only not state of the art 30 years ago, it was by definition future stuff or they wouldn't have patented it. It may not have been achievable by engineering 30 years ago and may not be achievable now. That is how patents work. Until you see what the state of the art is today, we don't know if that was a pipe dream or a reasonable way to proceed that was adopted.

The APG-81 definitely has more powerful jamming in X band for no other reason that the beam width and side lobes will increase immensely, decreasing power density, as you move away from the base frequency. That will also make your jamming much easier to detect and track.

I agree with your statement of search radars which just strengthens my point that even if you are visible to the low frequency air search radars, having control of the X-band, where all the targeting radars, airborne radars, and missile radars are, gives you a dramatic advantage. Imagine the AIC discussion with the 8 F-16s in their example, "Roger, six bandits inbound, buster 235 for 135, be advised they will get a couple of shots off before you can even detect them, hope that's not a problem".


Well, it's not really a question if that is achievable or not. It definitely is as there have been very widebad T/R modules available for a long time. It's basically a compromise between bandwidth and output power and later modules have improved both a lot. But I agree that radar requirements very likely narrow the achievable total bandwidth of the AN/APG-81 to less than what dedicated EW systems can do. Of course the best performance is in the X-band where the system is most likely optimized for. That's also where the most dangerous and numerous systems are. Jamming low frequency radars is more difficult for many reasons, but naturally those are also less numerous and do not present similar threat.

I see many advantages in dedicated jammer systems like NGJ or currently the Growler. One beauty of F-35 is that it can carry NGJ to support other F-35s and be far more effective and survivable than current dedicated jammer aircraft.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2018, 06:12
by gta4
I like to post this vid when F-35 haters show up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Kg-ztkPDok

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2018, 06:57
by wrightwing
The APG-81 isn't the only source of jamming/electronic attack. The ASQ-239 also has jamming capabilities.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2018, 09:32
by hornetfinn
wrightwing wrote:The APG-81 isn't the only source of jamming/electronic attack. The ASQ-239 also has jamming capabilities.


True. AFAIK, ASQ-239 actually is the source for jamming capabilities and APG-81 is basically just one antenna for it. Sure APG-81 has features designed to allow and maximize jamming capabilities, but it's the Barracuda which controls EW capabilities. APG-81 just provides big and very powerful antenna to ASQ-239 to do jamming in suitable frequencies. Of course the whole system is controlled by the fusion engine to maximize radar and EW (and possibly other) capabilties at the same time.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2018, 09:48
by popcorn
Also, not to forget the ALE-70 TAD which is tied into the ASQ-239

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2018, 16:58
by blindpilot
hornetfinn wrote:
wrightwing wrote:The APG-81 isn't the only source of jamming/electronic attack. The ASQ-239 also has jamming capabilities.


True. AFAIK, ASQ-239 actually is the source for jamming capabilities and APG-81 is basically just one antenna for it. Sure APG-81 has features designed to allow and maximize jamming capabilities, but it's the Barracuda which controls EW capabilities. APG-81 just provides big and very powerful antenna to ASQ-239 to do jamming in suitable frequencies. Of course the whole system is controlled by the fusion engine to maximize radar and EW (and possibly other) capabilties at the same time.


Good catch guys. I'm still struggling to come up with an analogy for this 5th Gen paradigm that is embedded in the fabric of the F-35. No feature, no element of a system is disconnected from the wholistic character of the design. The undiscovered meaning of this continues to challenge how we are thinking about problems. The irony is that the Gen Z iphone fed babies will grasp it, and maybe without being able to explain it well to "Pops."

Fifth Gen and F-35 concepts are just beginning to emerge. What we do now know is that the whole is much, much bigger than the sum of the parts.

MHO,
BP

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2018, 02:11
by nutshell
Can we finally rename it to Alpha35?

Because i'm sorry, the little devil is now the man among the kids.

And they ARE ALL kids.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2018, 06:05
by element1loop
blindpilot wrote:Fifth Gen and F-35 concepts are just beginning to emerge. What we do now know is that the whole is much, much bigger than the sum of the parts.

MHO,
BP


Over a decade ago now I remember reading a sour diatribe from a particularly myopic and strident geek-critic of the F-35A (an old poop) who dismissed F-35A VLO, sensor-fusion and networking as "mere digital-plumbing", and "some extra firing opportunities", and that it would still be limited and ineffectual due the number of weapons it carried, and by its much presumed (oh so obviously totally inadequate p:w) baseline fighter performance. According to him, F-35A was going to be a total fiasco, although he never was much of an airpower combat analyst.

I was repeatedly amazed that he completely failed to comprehend the synergistic tactical implications of such a jet. Which showed to me that even a computer-savvy and technically very informed person could still thoroughly fail to grasp the tactical advantages and opportunities of such a jet in a large-scale joint air-battle context. He simply didn"t understand that it could operate in a totally different way to prior aircraft. He just assumed it would slot into existing ways of doing things--merely evolutionary, rather than a discontinuity with the former conops, and air battle tactics.

So I think being younger, computer-savvy and coding-familiar, is just one pre-requisite. It still (obviouly) requires a certain rarer type of mind and traits, which the computerised experience during upbringing is more apt to bring to the fore, especially during the past 25 years or so. I'd say those types of minds naturally 'see' the potential of computers, and of networks per-sec (imagine the mind of a Bill Gates who envisioned and coded an entire operating system for disparate hardware, and then also having the traits of a tactical F-35 pilot .... system-of-systems tactical fight much?).

So if you get that sort of connective mind, then computer sharpen it, within the body of someone with the traits a fighter pilot ... well ... look out snoopy ... :crazypilot: :devil:

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 26 Aug 2018, 07:24
by vanshilar
nutshell wrote:Can we finally rename it to Alpha35?


Or just rename it Alpha-Q.

Sorry, stupid internet handle joke.

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 01 Sep 2018, 12:34
by aasm
Just reread the original article (post one here). Noticeably, Typhoon and Rafale ARE vmf compatible as verified during bold quest and trilat exercises...

Re: [Dutch F-35A Pilots] Out of the SHADOWS May 2018 PDF

Unread postPosted: 19 Nov 2018, 09:14
by citanon