Forum: General F-35 Forum

Quote:

...and johnwill is right, about low speeds.
Those who fight below their corner speeds, don't fight for long.

That is his opinion, and i respect that.

But keep in mind that have been said many times in the past, even by USAF pilots.
Clearly history proved them wrong.

While VVS still focus on WVR, its not like they are abandoming the BWR threat development by any means.

And why do all airforces train like hell on WVR tactics and manuvereing today?
If it is as you say, the F-22 should just remove its canon and save the dead weight..

Try not to put everything into a totality, black or white.
The WVR threat are not dead.

F-16.net Sponsor

haavarla wrote:

That is his opinion, and i respect that.

Well, that's an opinion formed out of the past 100 years of aerial combat and as such correct.

Quote:

The WVR threat are not dead.

And who said anything about close range fighting being dead?
But you need to realize that YouTube films you see on close in gun shots at 200 KIAS isn't the way you fight close combat.
With live ammo (and missiles), everything below M.7 is very risky business and only guys that can't really parry in any (and I mean ANY) other way go there, to try to even the field.

Last edited by haavarla on Mar 31, 2012 - 04:55 PM; edited 3 times in total

Quote:

Well, that's an opinion formed out of the past 100 years of aerial combat and as such correct.

Like in Vietnam?
Hell even in Desert Storm, most missiles AIM-7 etc where launched in WVR.. so no 100 years of areal combat does not conclude as such. Re-read the history again. There are plenty of good material/books out there.
Its one thing that all fighter manufactors and sub contractor strive to acheive the best performance to get an edge in BVR. That is just the way it works.
But as history shows us, all their advertized capability falls short when it comes to the real deal

Quote:

And who said anything about close range fighting being dead?
But you need to realize that YouTube films you see on close in gun shots at 200 KIAS isn't the way you fight close combat.
With live ammo (and missiles), everything below M.7 is very risky business and only guys that can't really parry in any (and I mean ANY) other way go there, to try to even the field.

Looks like shingen@ just did..

Quote:

How good are the jets in today's environment where it's about sensors, MMI, weapons, and BVR?
That's one of the reasons why the F-15 can still compete with(and with better sensors beat) the Su. It's better at high speed. Low speed high alpha is irrelevant for the way air forces want to fight today. What are the best planes here? Typhoon, F-15, F-16.

Look at the difference between the Typhoon and the Su. The Typhoon was also started after the F-15 and look what they did to make something better in aero performance. They sacrificed low speed handling to get what they wanted to make a plane that could fight with BVR weapons. If they go WVR they use HMS and HOBS.

By 'they' you mean Russian fighters?
They did not sacrifice anything, this is nonsens.
Their 4th gen fighters Can fly just as fast or even faster than some western fighters can. They have IRST to assist the Radar sensor. They also have HMS optional.

And further more if BVR missiles fails or all are used up, the merge are the next thing.. try doing a merge at 700kn Laughing

The speed drops fast. The speed will continue to drop with the Altidude until one get the upper hand and makes the kill. And in some cases the speed drops way down. And tell me, what do you do when you run out of altitude?
You spend all your kenetics on bleeding energy, IMO speed.
And suddenly you are bellow200kn.
Anyway, say hellow to airlial combat well bellow 700kn, which was where all combats happend in desert storm!
Edit: Bar a few engagments with Mig-25, where they was above mach.

Last edited by m on Mar 31, 2012 - 03:01 PM; edited 2 times in total

But how many jets were downed by cannon fire last decades, as well as were downed by using sidewinders (after the Falklands)?
During Bosnia, first years, only a few sidewinders have been used.
After that, as far as I know, only missiles as Amraam were used.

A cannon is still important, ground attack role. As well as for firing warning shots.
For instance civil aircraft, as well as just warning shots (Afghanistan)

* An Amraam B, Kosovo, fired by an F16 downed a Mig29; 30 sec after being fired

"Those who fight below their corner speeds, don't fight for long."

Can we isolate this so we can reference it regularly?

As in, look here and learn?

Cola, would you agree that your statement almost sums up the Typhoon design philosophy?

Quote:

But how many jets were downed by cannon fire last decades, as well as were downed by using sidewinders (after the Falklands)?
During Bosnia, first years, only a few sidewinders have been used.
After that, as far as I know, only missiles as Amraam were used.

A cannon is still important, ground attack role. As well as for firing warning shots.
For instance civil aircraft, as well as just warning shots (Afghanistan)

[i]* An Amraam B, Kosovo, fired by an F16 downed a Mig29; 30 sec after being fired

Thats fine. You can extract all those missiles kill in both desert storm and Kosovo against a few relic fighter assets with poor pilot skills and with zippo SA(Situational Awareness).
Vs an whole armada with 100% SA from AWACS and what not..
But i doubt this is the standard enemy NATO AF train to engage.. god forbid it should ever happend..
My point is if it is that standard, that is the next future enemy NATO AF expect to clash with, then all good.

haavarla wrote:

Thats fine. You can extract all those missiles kill in both desert storm and Kosovo against a few relic fighter assets with poor pilot skills and with zippo SA(Situational Awareness).

That's strange, I seem to recall from an AFM article a few months after the conflict that the Serbian pilots were actually considered to be the elite of their airforce. Most Iraqi pilots had plenty of combat hours behind them too from the Iran-Iraq war, unlike the USAF pilots who shot them down. I wonder what other excuses can be trotted out...

(I seem to recall those pilots were bitter losers too, they actually claimed NATO jets were trying to gun kill them on their parachutes! )

Quote:

The WVR threat are not dead.

And who said anything about close range fighting being dead?
But you need to realize that YouTube films you see on close in gun shots at 200 KIAS isn't the way you fight close combat.
With live ammo (and missiles), everything below M.7 is very risky business and only guys that can't really parry in any (and I mean ANY) other way go there, to try to even the field.[/quote]

Actually in a Gun only fight (lets just say we are out of AIM-9X and what not) the speed will quickly drop below 200KIAS. Well below. If the defensive guy in front knows how to defend himself, he will be in idle with the speed brakes extended jinking the best he can and doing all he can to create a closure problem to the offender, thereby forcing an overshot or stack. You don't get the guy behind you to scoot out in front if you are going faster then him. It's just that simple. If your the offender, you will do your best to fly slower and/or fly a longer path (barrel) then the guy ahead of you.

Now, speed is life, and you better know your best corner speed (or plateau if in a Viper) and your opponents as well, since this will determine your gameplan (single or two circle fight), but at some point, if the fight is not over after the first turn or two, you will find yourself close to the hard deck, with the speed well below corner. I've never seen a prolonged fight were the speed and altitude increased during the fight. Never.

@shingen,
well, I didn't invent hot water here.."speed is life" in different forms reads on the first page of all flying schoolbooks around the world (to the best my knowledge) and I'm not aware of fighter pilot's schools that encourage fighting at low speeds.
As for EF's design idea, yes and the same goes for F22.

@havaarla,

Quote:

Like in Vietnam?

Yes, like in Vietnam. Look, I think, you're mixing things here, badly.
That for the fighter aircraft the speed is of paramount importance (which was what JW said and I commented on), doesn't have anything to do with AAM's performance from Vietnam era.

Quote:

Looks like shingen@ just did..

How do you figure replying to me with what someone else said??
I've raised some points of which you addressed none, so no you can't do that.

Quote:

.. try doing a merge at 700kn Laughing

You merge at 700 KIAS (not KTAS) if you can, but I suppose you wouldn't know much about that...

Quote:

And suddenly you are bellow200kn.

Yes, but sooner in Mig29, then in F16...that's the whole point.

Quote:

Anyway, say hellow to airlial combat well bellow 700kn, which was where all combats happend in desert storm!

As Rodriguez said, they fought on the deck in Iraq, so what do you expect when 700 KIAS is your practical top speed in some configurations?
(and yet they remained transonic, until AWACS solved inbound raids and possible unannounced pop-ups, which really tells you all you need to know)

Finally, one more point (forgot who raised it)...ALL shots in 1999 over Serbia were BVR.
If you check date and time logs, you'll see that it was dark (night) at given operating altitudes at that time and date.

guy@rdaf.dk wrote:

Actually in a Gun only fight (lets just say we are out of AIM-9X and what not) the speed will quickly drop below 200KIAS. Well below. If the defensive guy in front knows how to defend himself, he will be in idle with the speed brakes extended jinking the best he can and doing all he can to create a closure problem to the offender, thereby forcing an overshot or stack. You don't get the guy behind you to scoot out in front if you are going faster then him. It's just that simple. If your the offender, you will do your best to fly slower and/or fly a longer path (barrel) then the guy ahead of you.

Yea, this is all well and fine, but only in 1 on 1 controlled combat (besides if you fired all missiles, turn and go home while you still can, otherwise you may be returning in casket), which air combats usually aren't particularly when AWACS makes a nasty popup call, just as you're about turn into the bandit.

In real world going down to 200 KIAS is last ditch maneuver and something no one (except hot-shot kids) really wants to do.
Then those kids, if survive initial engagements, grow to men and they don't do that anymore, or at least that's my opinion on the matter.

cola wrote:

guy@rdaf.dk wrote:

Actually in a Gun only fight (lets just say we are out of AIM-9X and what not) the speed will quickly drop below 200KIAS. Well below. If the defensive guy in front knows how to defend himself, he will be in idle with the speed brakes extended jinking the best he can and doing all he can to create a closure problem to the offender, thereby forcing an overshot or stack. You don't get the guy behind you to scoot out in front if you are going faster then him. It's just that simple. If your the offender, you will do your best to fly slower and/or fly a longer path (barrel) then the guy ahead of you.

Yea, this is all well and fine, but only in 1(+) on 1 controlled combat (besides if you fired all missiles, turn and go home while you still can, otherwise you may be returning in casket), which air combats usually aren't particularly when AWACS makes a nasty popup call, just as you're about turn into the bandit.

In real world going down to 200 KIAS is last ditch maneuver and something no one (except hot-shot kids) really wants to do.
Then those kids, if survive initial engagements, grow to men and they don't do that anymore, or at least that's my opinion on the matter.

Well why do we all practice BFM then, if all the engagements could be settled BVR? (other then the fact that it is the most fun you can have with your pants on)

In many scenarios you would have to visually ID your opponent before engaging. Might get you in a position where you are outside your ideal "fights on" position. Or lets just say you where suckered into a WVR fight in a disadvantage position and now you are doing your best to survive at slow speed until the help arrives in the form of your wingman or an other flight of Vipers.

Real pilots (and not only hot-shot kids) practice their game at all the regimes. Fast, slow, high, low, and often with a disadvantage to start with since this is part of being a good fighter pilot that knows his aircraft and his own limitations.

haavarla wrote:

Quote:

But how many jets were downed by cannon fire last decades, as well as were downed by using sidewinders (after the Falklands)?
During Bosnia, first years, only a few sidewinders have been used.
After that, as far as I know, only missiles as Amraam were used.

A cannon is still important, ground attack role. As well as for firing warning shots.
For instance civil aircraft, as well as just warning shots (Afghanistan)

[i]* An Amraam B, Kosovo, fired by an F16 downed a Mig29; 30 sec after being fired

Thats fine. You can extract all those missiles kill in both desert storm and Kosovo against a few relic fighter assets with poor pilot skills and with zippo SA(Situational Awareness).
Vs an whole armada with 100% SA from AWACS and what not..
But i doubt this is the standard enemy NATO AF train to engage.. god forbid it should ever happend..
My point is if it is that standard, that is the next future enemy NATO AF expect to clash with, then all good.

Quote:

Quote: a few relic fighter assets with poor pilot skills and with zippo SA(Situational Awareness).

Kills Iraqi and Syrian Airforces

Iraqi Air-to-Air Victories since 1967:
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_404.shtml

Syria:
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_272.shtml

Still impressive with "poor" pilot skills. Except for the UK, there isn't any European Airforce with such a list of victories.

* Mainly missiles were used, although 20 mm guns often were used against helicopters

Last edited by cola on Mar 31, 2012 - 07:14 PM; edited 2 times in total

guy@rdaf.dk wrote:

Well why do we all practice BFM then, if all the engagements could be settled BVR? (other then the fact that it is the most fun you can have with your pants on)

Because, you need to be able to cope should the situation arise.
However, you have a brain, so don't let it happen in the first place.
It'd be irresponsible of command not to prepare their pilots for all situations, but still it doesn't mean pilots should throw themselves into crap.

Quote:

In many scenarios you would have to visually ID your opponent before engaging.

Yes and this is why you let spotter ahead in a high speed pass and maintain shooter behind with the finger on the trigger.
The deal is no one ever needs to turn and whichever way the bandits turn, both are at high energy states, so they can turn and run, if necessary (outnumbered, low on fuel, weapons, whatever).

Quote:

Or lets just say you where suckered into a WVR fight in a disadvantage position and now you are doing your best to survive at slow speed until the help arrives in the form of your wingman or an other flight of Vipers.

Don't get sucked into such combat, in the first place.
If you got sucked into unfavorable fight often (and that's more than once per situation), that means that either someone badly mistaken when taught you tactics (school's fault), you got incompetent orders (command's fault), or you just may wanna reconsider profession (your own fault).

Quote:

Real pilots (and not only hot-shot kids) practice their game at all the regimes.

No objections here and pilots should be prepared for anything.
But as I said, they should do all to avoid such situations in the first place.
Look, I meant no offense on hot-shot kids...it's just that I saw many of them wanting to end the combat too quickly, which usually didn't end up so well.

Also, one circle fight doesn't confer protection against HOBS missiles even on deck and at corner speed, but will leave you slow and an easy target, even in 1 on 1.

But as I said, this is only my opinion.
If you wanna turn in for a gun shot at 200 KIAS/15kft, in real combat, hats off.
I wouldn't.

Good discussion everyone. This has turned out to be much more useful than I thought it would when the topic started.

A few thoughts in no particular order:

On the original subject of this thread... why doesn't someone calculate an F-16 block 60's wing loading and power to weight ratio? (I think the answer might surprise some who have been advocating building more 4th generation airframes because the F-35 is too F-105-like for their tastes.)

haavarla, being patriotic is all well and good, but facts are facts. Russia has produced many fine engineers and scientists, and many fine aircraft, but this whole "Russia strong!" thing gets old in a hurry. Every aircraft is a collection of compromises. The Mig-29 and Su-27 have strengths and weaknesses like any other aircraft.

On the whole WVR/BVR issue. Nobody anywhere is seriously suggesting that WVR won't occur in the future or that we shouldn't train for it. That said, it has been a LONG time since Viet Nam. Just as the V-1 was a good idea but ahead of its time, so were the early attempts at BVR missile systems. More modern engagements have shown that missiles like the AMRAAM are quite effective. (that does not require 100% pk)

While I am on this, it is important to recognize that visual range doesn't mean you are necessarily talking about going to the merge or a turning fight. You might be able to see a fighter at 8-10NM(or even slightly more under perfect conditions), but you are talking about little more than a speck at those ranges and you aren't talking about a "dogfight" where a highly maneuverable aircraft would have a meaningful advantage.

8-12 miles is a reasonable definition of visual range in that yes, you could hypothetically -see- your opponent if conditions are good, but that isn't visual range like people on message boards seem to think. Very very few of the engagements in the last couple decades were the kind of fight where low speed nose pointing ability mattered one bit. Bottom line, a kill at 6-12 or so miles might technically be within visual range on a nice clear day, but it is hardly an argument for air-show maneuvers and until very recently was really only possible with a BVR weapon. (Some newer IR missiles can be effective at those ranges, but older IR missiles really don't become effective until significantly closer.)

Why is it that the Typhoon and F-22 are optimized for high speed and the F-35 is designed to have good acceleration to get to high speed easily?

Why is it that the forwards swept wing was never brought into service?

Every fact out there supports the assertion that speed is life, BVR rules, and to avoid slow turning fights.

Forum: General F-35 Forum

JSF High Wing Loading: why?