Pilot would rather be in the F-35C

“…like it's little better acceleration.”

This.

Don't get that fuel fraction is a big determinant in how well any particular version of the F-35 is going to turn and accelerate which is largely determined by how far you are from the runway when you start engaging in ACM.

A lucid discussion of variant acceleration performance from years ago.

https://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/20 ... 2.html?m=1

A lucid discussion of variant acceleration performance from years ago.

https://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/20 ... 2.html?m=1

@quicksilver... All that chart tells you is that if your flying an F-35B or F-35C, you need to use the SR-71 technique and dive through the transonic drag zone to save time and fuel if you want to go supersonic.

The only time you need to go that fast in an F-3B or F-35C is if you are trying to catch a cruise missile.

Operating weight empty.

Am sure the rest will be beneficial for your general understanding of variant differences.

“…like it's little better acceleration.”

This.

Don't get that fuel fraction is a big determinant in how well any particular version of the F-35 is going to turn and accelerate which is largely determined by how far you are from the runway when you start engaging in ACM.

It's also going to be a different story if A2A tactics involves maintaining a high-radius from the known hostiles, and remaining VLO, rather than needlessly burning fuel and taking heroic risks in close for no good reason. The fuel and speed of the aircraft needed to obtain the effects, can be managed like no fighter before it.

The aircraft can do it. But can the pilot get it done without being seen? THAT ... is a 'stealth' fighting.

If not, they're the wrong pilot, with the wrong training.........................................in the right jet.

Fair points, but not what was asked. And, obtw, bfm training is still conducted…daily…as we debate which dog is bigger than which and ponder hypothetical futures.

My bet us the guys flying them will figure it all out long before we do.

I'm betting they do too.

FWIW I'd say there is a strong likelihood that the guy in the article is talking about Hornet v F-35, rather than Super Hornet as the article initially states.

Interesting that you felt the need to point that out. Did that hit you in the ribs or…where?

Nope, I have plenty of hours/years flying both (as well as *I think* every production lot of the F/A-18A-F and EA-18G). Point being that the Hornet and Block 2 Super Hornet are very different beasts. Almost no comparison in terms of capabilities. It was more of a "point of order" than anything, but saying the F-35C is way better than the F/A-18A+/C isn't exactly telling in terms of the more relevant comparison between flying the F/A-18E/F and the F-35C. Flew with the F-35C a decent amount before I left active duty, and it is a very impressive aircraft, so no, I am not offended by someone saying that it is an improvement either.

There are something I want to ask.
From the F-18E/F manual, it has frequency selective bulkhead which can be installed in war time to reduce RCS. So do you guys just have a bunch of aircraft FSS radome lying around in the storage waiting to be installed?. Or those things are filter and kits to put inside the radome?. Also I heard that the radome of F-35 is welded into their body, and thus can't be open at all? Is that true