Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise.

Design and construction
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8396
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 17:10

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2012/November%202012/1112fighter.aspx

The F-35, while not technically a "supercruising" aircraft, can maintain Mach 1.2 for a dash of 150 miles without using fuel-gulping afterburners.

"Mach 1.2 is a good speed for you, according to the pilots," O’Bryan said.


This confirms two things.
1. LM does not consider just going over M to be supercruising.
2. It can :)

Moreover, the surface material smoothes out over time, slightly reducing the F-35’s original radar signature, according to the Lockheed Martin official. Only serious structural damage will disturb the F-35’s low observability, O’Bryan said, and Lockheed Martin has devised an array of field repairs that can restore full stealthiness in just a few hours.

The F-35’s radar cross section, or RCS, has a "maintenance margin," O’Bryan explained, meaning it’s "always better than the spec." Minor scratches and even dents won’t affect the F-35’s stealth qualities enough to degrade its combat performance, in the estimation of the company. Field equipment will be able to assess RCS right on the flight line, using far less cumbersome gear than has previously been needed to make such calculations.


You read that right, the F-35's RCS gets BETTER over time, not worse through normal use.

Much, much more at the jump.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

BDF

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2006, 13:54

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 17:42

Not terribly surprising. Now the more interesting questions are at what altitude(s) can it sustain said Mach point and how much does does it effect range? Yes they say a dash of 150nm but that really doesn't tell us much. Good to hear the program is progressing and the jet is delivering promised capability.
When it comes to fighting Raptors, "We die wholesale..."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8396
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 17:45

From what I have read, supercruising uses 75%-100% more gas per mile than going m0.9. So if it's 150 at M1.2 then that would be about 250-300 subsonic.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4539
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 17:46

First time I have read that it excels n the transonic.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5444
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 17:52

I wonder if Bill Sweetman will tell us about this at Ares. ;-)
"There I was. . ."
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3288
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 18:44

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:First time I have read that it excels n the transonic.

One of the first things I heard was that it was designed from the ground up for transonic.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3288
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 18:58

Did you catch this?
"We’ve taken it to a different level," O’Bryan said. The stealth of the production F-35—verified in radar cross section tests performed on classified western test ranges—is better than that of any aircraft other than the F-22.
Offline

sketch22

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2012, 11:08
  • Location: California

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 19:02

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

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3288
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 19:07

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."

:whistle: 8)
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8396
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 19:22

count_to_10 wrote:Did you catch this?
"We’ve taken it to a different level," O’Bryan said. The stealth of the production F-35—verified in radar cross section tests performed on classified western test ranges—is better than that of any aircraft other than the F-22.
That's been known for a while.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-4408.html

Nov 2005: The U.S. Air Force, in it’s effort to get money to build more F-22s, has revealed just how “stealthy” the F-22 is. It’s RCS (Radar Cross Section) is the equivalent, for a radar, to a metal marble. The less stealthy (and much cheaper) F-35, is equal to a metal golf ball. The F-35 stealthiness is a bit better than the B-2 bomber, which, in turn, was twice as good as that on the even older F-117.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5444
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 19:35

SpudmanWP wrote:
Nov 2005: The U.S. Air Force, in it’s effort to get money to build more F-22s, has revealed just how “stealthy” the F-22 is. It’s RCS (Radar Cross Section) is the equivalent, for a radar, to a metal marble. The less stealthy (and much cheaper) F-35, is equal to a metal golf ball. The F-35 stealthiness is a bit better than the B-2 bomber, which, in turn, was twice as good as that on the even older F-117.


Except that according to Ben Rich the F-117's RCS was the size of a marble. :?:
"There I was. . ."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8396
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 19:39

Maybe they were being conservative. I was using it more as a gauge on how the different platforms relate to each other.

F-22 < F-35 < B-2 < F-117.

They may also be talking about either one aspect of it's RCS or overall RCS...
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

sketch22

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2012, 11:08
  • Location: California

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:02

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

Do you mean like frontal RCS vs rear RCS?
Offline

falconedge

Banned

  • Posts: 42
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:41

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:10

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

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

falconedge

Banned

  • Posts: 42
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:41

Unread post03 Nov 2012, 20:13

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

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

Return to F-35 Design & Construction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests