Agile F-35 High Wing Loading

[jjk]

No, but a video like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBlP4cCRVmk would be nice and perhaps telling.

I don't know why you would think it might be telling. Even the video you show tells you nothing other than, in those specific instances, the aircraft finished their turns in a particular order (assuming the videos haven't been played with). Do you know if the aircraft were flying the same speed? Pulling the same Gs? Flying at the same altitude? Flying at comparable percentages of gross? The video tells you none of those things so, in fact, it tells you very little.

Yup, but i still have not seen a video of a tight 360 turn of a F-35...

[spazsinbad]

"Yup, but i still have not seen a video of a tight 360 turn of a F-35..."

Send an e-mail request to LM for one to be put on their Youtube website - with details of the circumstances as indicated by others here + PLUS the 'dangerboy' music would be a real plus. Here ya go....: https://www.f35.com/contact

F-35 AirShowNews: https://www.f35.com/news/airshows

[hornetfinn]

In the end, I often imagine the F-35 as an F/A-18 with more power or an F-16 with less power but higher AOA.

B and C-models definitely have lower power to weight ratio than F-16, but A-model has equal or superior T/W ratio depending on loadouts (and of course F-16 variant). Especially with heavier A/G loads, even B and C-models have superior T/W ratio to any F-16 model. With equal fuel fractions (or about equal range performance), they also have pretty comparable T/W ratio with BVR A-A loads, although F-35B and C have lower T/W when both have light A-A loadout. Comparison is even better for F-35 if dry thrust is compared. Of course the main difference is that F-35 models carry huge amount of internal fuel and F-16 carries pretty modest amount of internal fuel in comparison and must carry external fuel tanks to have even close to similar fuel fraction and range to F-35. I'd say that in very light A-A loadouts, F-35A is F-16 with higher AOA and B and C are probably close to Super Hornet when it comes to maneuverability characteristics.

[mrigdon]

The fact that you can compare the B and C models to the F-16 is a testament to the performance of the JSF. The B model is replacing the Harrier (and secondarily the original Hornet), a plane that in no way approaches the performance of the F-16.

The C model is replacing the plain Hornet for the Navy (and will probably end up replacing the Super Hornet as well), another plane that was never considered a real match to the F-16. In fact, in a straight up, one-to-one competition, the F-16 beat out the F-17 for the original Air Force contract. I don't think that anyone considers the F-18 to be superior to the F-17 from an aerodynamic/dogfight perspective.

Comparative performance between the F-35A and the F-16 is complex, but the main thing to remember is that the F-16 has to carry external tanks to get to the same places the F-35A will reach on internal fuel. While the F-16 can drop those external tanks and gain some performance, those tanks aren't free. The F-16 has to get back home and then have new tanks fitted in order to go out again, while an F-35A will just burn off the fuel, lose the weight (suffer some drag penalty, but not comparable to an F-16 with tanks), and then return home and refuel to do it all again.

Those external tanks aren't free, after all. And the political cost of wiping out civilians when an empty gas tank drops on their house (or head) shouldn't be sneered at.

[zero-one]

. In fact, in a straight up, one-to-one competition, the F-16 beat out the F-17 for the original Air Force contract. I don't think that anyone considers the F-18 to be superior to the F-17 from an aerodynamic/dogfight perspective.

depends on how you make the comparison,
If you're talking about high Gs and high speed turning fights, then you're absolutely right, the F/A-18, as good as it is, will always be behind the Viper.

But talk about slow speed high AOA fights, and the F/A-18 will always eat the viper in that scenario.

so the F-35 is really designed to have the best of both worlds,

slightly inferior to a clean F-16, but equal to lightly loaded one, it makes up for this by having all of the Rhino's high AOA tricks which is useful in today's point and shoot dogfights.

There is a nifty video of a Jap F-2 with a centerline tank doing some good turns, would you guys reckon that the F-35 performs somewhat like this?

[shrimpman]

Those external tanks aren't free, after all.

Sorry for a weird, off-topic question, but how much would a 370 gallon fuel tank cost. I mean just an approximate range. Would I be wrong to assume something around 10,000 USD?

[mor10]

Those external tanks aren't free, after all.

Sorry for a weird, off-topic question, but how much would a 370 gallon fuel tank cost. I mean just an approximate range. Would I be wrong to assume something around 10,000 USD?

I don't know, but I would guess you're missing at least a zero. The darn thing is not just an empty shell.

[basher54321]

Those external tanks aren't free, after all. And the political cost of wiping out civilians when an empty gas tank drops on their house (or head) shouldn't be sneered at.

Some did alright:
http://theaviationist.com/2013/09/18/fuel-tanks-se-asia/

[spazsinbad]

I would suggest that the 'boat tanks' were made from drop tanks left behind at air bases - rather than dropped in flight. I have personal knowledge of what happens to a drop tank full of fuel dropped (inadvertently) a few seconds after take off - very small bits of shredded metal is an apt description. Then to get even more personal: I foolishly dropped an empty drop tank in an armament dive (so 450 KIAS at about 3K feet?). The follow on A4G saw this tank do a slow barrel roll before impact, which left the tank more or less intact (although holed) with a VERY LARGE irregular dent on most of the side that impacted the dirt, which would make an unusually useless 'droptank boat' I reckon. Long ago a jpg of me on this tank was uploaded here I think. Photo was made for our squadron line book to point out what a useless sprog fck I was.

[KamenRiderBlade]

Drop Tanks as canoes, that makes sense, the shape is good for it.

[johnwill]

Those external tanks aren't free, after all.

Sorry for a weird, off-topic question, but how much would a 370 gallon fuel tank cost. I mean just an approximate range. Would I be wrong to assume something around 10,000 USD?

I don't know, but I would guess you're missing at least a zero. It darn thing is not just an empty shell.

Fact is, it is mostly an empty sheet metal shell. It has some pipes to transfer fuel between tank cells and into the wings, but no pumps or gauge system. The expensive part is the pylon, especially the ejector mechanism. The pylon is bolted to the tank, so it goes when the tank goes.

[zero-one]

Hey Johnwill, Im pretty sure I heard somewhere here that you worked on the Jap F-2 or atleast the F-16 Agile falcon program which was the basis for the F-2.

What can you say about it and how would it compare against the F-35?

[popcorn]

I read a long time ago dropping a fuel tank was the equivalent of jettisoning a brand new BMW.

[spazsinbad]

Deliberately or not dropping the 'wrong store' was a sackable offence - in theory - however the A-4 had a notoriously bad set of armament switches in an almost inaccessible spot - not easily seen. Anyway as I probably mentioned when telling this story earlier - my bacon was saved whilst standing outside the Senior Pilot Office (XO) - awaiting my fate - when word came that one of our A4G instructors had dropped an empty rocket pod on the range in the next sortie. I was told to piss off toot sweet. PHEW! I think in both our cases it was having the usual practice stores on stations that were not usual and bad habit patterns causing fumble fingers - but if you have a bad day - for whatever reason - it is a bad day.

This old thread has some drop tank info: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... ozi#211731

Some good info about OLD A-4 EFTs here: http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com.au/2 ... tanks.html & http://tailspintopics.blogspot.com/2012 ... tanks.html

[popcorn]

This should be interesting.

http://m.aviationweek.com/defense/f-35- ... -maneuvers