Acceleration for F-35

Discuss the F-35 Lightning II
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

uclass

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 962
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2013, 16:05

Unread post25 Aug 2013, 19:31

Are there any acceleration or time to climb figures from standstill for the F-35 yet?
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2758
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post25 Aug 2013, 22:19

Yes, and No.
Offline

uclass

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 962
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2013, 16:05

Unread post26 Aug 2013, 14:04

Any links/info.?
Offline

cywolf32

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post26 Aug 2013, 14:10

Same as clean block 50 F-16. No time to climb data AFAIK.
Offline

energo

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 520
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2007, 14:06

Unread post26 Aug 2013, 16:38

Probably a bit outdated, but gives a rough idea. The colored chart is range, speed/acceleration and manoeuvrability.

/BB
Attachments
F-16vsF-35.jpg
Norway F-35 program brief, June 2012.
F-16vsF-35-2.jpg
Norway F-35 program brief, June 2012.
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8399
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post26 Aug 2013, 17:08

original PDF link?
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

uclass

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 962
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2013, 16:05

Unread post26 Aug 2013, 20:08

So that's Mach 0.6 - Mach 0.95 at 15,000ft level flight if I'm reading it right.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4547
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post26 Aug 2013, 21:27

That's what it looks like, and it seems to be from flight test data. So the A is as quick as a Viper (nothing new there), the B is as quick as a viper with bags (subsonic, would likely blow past it trans/supersonic), and the big wing on the C slows it down beyond that. All in all, those are pretty good numbers.
"Spurts"

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

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2877
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post27 Aug 2013, 06:29

I wonder if the F-16C acceleration with tanks is with tanks full or empty? I also wonder what the fuel state is in those acceleration figures? Also are these numbers calculated with downrated (end-of-life) engines on F-35 as in current range calculations?

In the text it says that F-35 has equal or better maneuverability in air-to-air configuration to F-16C. In air-to-ground configuration it has better maneuverability due to more powerful engine and lower air resistance (drag).

It'd be interesting to know the equal numbers for EF Typhoon and Dassault Rafale (and Russian products also).
Offline

disconnectedradical

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post27 Aug 2013, 13:37

On that acceleration diagram, which block is that F-16C?
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4547
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post27 Aug 2013, 16:51

I would have to guess it is tanks empty. the difference in times is such that I doubt it could overcome the additional mass AND the drag with such a small % increase in time.

As for which block, does it matter that much? If it's a 30 then it's a hot rod but if its a 42 then it's a dog? no model of the Viper has ever been described as sluggish in subsonic acceleration.
"Spurts"

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

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1070
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post27 Aug 2013, 19:50

Let me translate the Norwegian text in this slide:

Just guessing, but I would think they are using the Norwegian version of the F-16 for comparison, which is a F-16A MLU.

Image

Reach - F-35 have significantly longer reach with the same weapon-load. Equally it has the possibility of longer endurance

Speed/Acceleration - F-16 is described as a Mach 2 fighter but as soon as one hangs weapon on it the speed is limited to Mach 1.6 or lower. Equipped for the mission both aircraft falls within the same speed and acceleration zone.

Maneuvering - In air-to-air the F-35 has equal or better maneuvering capabilities compared to the F-16. In air-to-ground configuration the F-35 has better maneuvering mainly due the powerful engine and lower drag due to internal carriage of the weapons.
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4547
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post27 Aug 2013, 21:18

Thanks for the translation. So it's possible that the F-16 data listed (and the F-35 data) is for mission loadouts.
"Spurts"

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

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3291
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post28 Aug 2013, 01:29

That's in afterburner, correct?
Wasn't one of the qualities of the F135 that its wet/dry thrust ratio was relatively low?
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline

disconnectedradical

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 753
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post28 Aug 2013, 05:15

Isn't the F-16A MLU rather underpowered since it uses F100-PW-220? Then again, the chart does say the more powerful F-16C.
Next

Return to General F-35 Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests