Official statement: The F-35 CAN Supercruise.

Design and construction
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post18 Nov 2012, 23:59

SpudmanWP wrote:
wilhelm wrote:But US fighter pilots arent cleared for BVR engagements
That depends on the situation.
wilhelm wrote: and they require Visual Identification,
Not always. The F-35 can ID an adversary using any number of methods (over 600) that are not available to any other US fighter. When a VID is needed, EOTS can provide that at almost 50nm, well outside typical WVR ranges.
wilhelm wrote:furthermore for such engagements the F35 will need to carry Externally mounted long range weapons which mess up their RCS.
The F-35 can carry 4 internal BVR missiles at IOC and plans are in the works to carry more.
wilhelm wrote:Also the F35 does not feature the F22s x band stealth because that is prohibited from being exported,
Sorry, but you are COMPLETELY wrong on this point.
wilhelm wrote: additionally all of its modern competitors feature L band radar which defeats the stealth technology.
The only verified airborne L-Band usage has been a proposed upgrade for Flankers that would fit in the wing leading edges. Due to it's small size, it's effectiveness vs any stealth aircraft is questionable.
wilhelm wrote:Additionally the F14 could do like mach 2.5.
The F-15 has been above m1.2 while in combat maybe a handful of times. The drag penalty is tremendous when armed. The F-35 was designed with this combat history in mind.
wilhelm wrote:Most engagements are likely to be within visual range, and radars can be actively jammed.
Historically, the range of missile combat has been getting longer and longer, not shorter.

btw, Welcome to F-16.net, but you seriously need to do some research before posting so much "info" that is contrary to what is know already about the program.

Could have spared yourself. Seeing as he hasn't bothered to ask any questions, I don't think he really cares to have anything explained to him.
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:03

count_to_10 wrote:
The F-15 has been above m1.2 while in combat maybe a handful of times. The drag penalty is tremendous when armed. The F-35 was designed with this combat history in mind.

Spud, is there a missing "not" or "never" in that?
What part?
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7267
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:12

wilhelm wrote:But US fighter pilots arent cleared for BVR engagements and they require Visual Identification, furthermore for such engagements the F35 will need to carry Externally mounted long range weapons which mess up their RCS. Within visual range stealth doesnt work, and you can lock on using IRST to track their engine exhaust. Also the F35 does not feature the F22s x band stealth because that is prohibited from being exported, additionally all of its modern competitors feature L band radar which defeats the stealth technology. Additionally the F14 could do like mach 2.5. Most engagements are likely to be within visual range, and radars can be actively jammed.


You are really outdoing yourself here man. LOL. Wow. Everything you put up there is utterly false. Where are you getting your information?
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3300
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:14

SpudmanWP wrote:
count_to_10 wrote:
The F-15 has been above m1.2 while in combat maybe a handful of times. The drag penalty is tremendous when armed. The F-35 was designed with this combat history in mind.

Spud, is there a missing "not" or "never" in that?
What part?
:doh:
Never mind -- misread what you wrote.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

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

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:15

XanderCrews wrote:
wilhelm wrote:But US fighter pilots arent cleared for BVR engagements and they require Visual Identification, furthermore for such engagements the F35 will need to carry Externally mounted long range weapons which mess up their RCS. Within visual range stealth doesnt work, and you can lock on using IRST to track their engine exhaust. Also the F35 does not feature the F22s x band stealth because that is prohibited from being exported, additionally all of its modern competitors feature L band radar which defeats the stealth technology. Additionally the F14 could do like mach 2.5. Most engagements are likely to be within visual range, and radars can be actively jammed.

You are really outdoing yourself here man. LOL. Wow. Everything you put up there is utterly false. Where are you getting your information?

Obviously APA.
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3300
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:18

1st503rdsgt wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
wilhelm wrote:But US fighter pilots arent cleared for BVR engagements and they require Visual Identification, furthermore for such engagements the F35 will need to carry Externally mounted long range weapons which mess up their RCS. Within visual range stealth doesnt work, and you can lock on using IRST to track their engine exhaust. Also the F35 does not feature the F22s x band stealth because that is prohibited from being exported, additionally all of its modern competitors feature L band radar which defeats the stealth technology. Additionally the F14 could do like mach 2.5. Most engagements are likely to be within visual range, and radars can be actively jammed.

You are really outdoing yourself here man. LOL. Wow. Everything you put up there is utterly false. Where are you getting your information?

Obviously APA.

I thought APA was more pro F-22?
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

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

borntoholdout

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 17:06
  • Location: closer than you think

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:20

The fastest I've even heard of for an F- 14/15/16 or 18 in combat is 1.4 mach. If my memory is correct "Dozer" (sorry can't remember his name) hit 1.4 mach intercepting a Mig-29 in Gulf War 1. I think he held that speed for almost 30 sec. :D
Last edited by borntoholdout on 19 Nov 2012, 00:26, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8408
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:23

The APA has painted itself into a corner.

By demonizing the F-35 and putting all it's hopes on the F-22, it no longer has any plane to pin it's hopes on for an effective AU fighter.

Things are going to get real interesting when VMFA-121 shows up at its first Red Flag.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

f-22lm

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: 04 May 2012, 03:09
  • Location: Miami

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:23

count_to_10 wrote:
1st503rdsgt wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
wilhelm wrote:But US fighter pilots arent cleared for BVR engagements and they require Visual Identification, furthermore for such engagements the F35 will need to carry Externally mounted long range weapons which mess up their RCS. Within visual range stealth doesnt work, and you can lock on using IRST to track their engine exhaust. Also the F35 does not feature the F22s x band stealth because that is prohibited from being exported, additionally all of its modern competitors feature L band radar which defeats the stealth technology. Additionally the F14 could do like mach 2.5. Most engagements are likely to be within visual range, and radars can be actively jammed.

You are really outdoing yourself here man. LOL. Wow. Everything you put up there is utterly false. Where are you getting your information?

Obviously APA.

I thought APA was more pro F-22?
Billy Sweatman :D.
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:29

count_to_10 wrote:
1st503rdsgt wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
wilhelm wrote:But US fighter pilots arent cleared for BVR engagements and they require Visual Identification, furthermore for such engagements the F35 will need to carry Externally mounted long range weapons which mess up their RCS. Within visual range stealth doesnt work, and you can lock on using IRST to track their engine exhaust. Also the F35 does not feature the F22s x band stealth because that is prohibited from being exported, additionally all of its modern competitors feature L band radar which defeats the stealth technology. Additionally the F14 could do like mach 2.5. Most engagements are likely to be within visual range, and radars can be actively jammed.

You are really outdoing yourself here man. LOL. Wow. Everything you put up there is utterly false. Where are you getting your information?

Obviously APA.

I thought APA was more pro F-22?

Not anymore. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/russia-stealth/
I like how David Axe refers to Carlo Kopp's fanboy site as an "independent think-tank." Word to the wise... the word "independent" in relation to any publication generally translates as "isolated from any relevant source of information."
The sky is blue because God loves the Infantry.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3300
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:38

Not anymore. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/russia-stealth/
I like how David Axe refers to Carlo Kopp's fanboy site as an "independent think-tank." Word to the wise... the word "independent" in relation to any publication generally translates as "isolated from any relevant source of information."


I find that "independent" usually is a way of saying "purely partisan, but not technically associated with us".
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

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

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7267
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:51

1st503rdsgt wrote:Not anymore. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/russia-stealth/
I like how David Axe refers to Carlo Kopp's fanboy site as an "independent think-tank." Word to the wise... the word "independent" in relation to any publication generally translates as "isolated from any relevant source of information."


I think that it is incredible thata Carlo Kopp analysis of pictures is called a "first scientific examination"

If APA rated women:

Image

assessment: Total disaster. Not beautiful. Not Russian.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 26182
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 00:58

SALT (look it up - movie). :D [OK - I did http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0944835/plotsummary ]
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 01:13

FYI The F-14A/B/D had fixed intakes for most of its service life. This limited the speed to 2.0

The F-15 Can go at least Mach 1.2(Mach 2.0+ as I recall) with 4 missiles on conformal plyons. Remember the incident when the Oregon ANG alert jets went supersonic up to Seattle?
Offline

borntoholdout

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 115
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 17:06
  • Location: closer than you think

Unread post19 Nov 2012, 01:33

neurotech wrote:FYI The F-14A/B/D had fixed intakes for most of its service life. This limited the speed to 2.0

The F-15 Can go at least Mach 1.2(Mach 2.0+ as I recall) with 4 missiles on conformal plyons. Remember the incident in Portland when the Oregon ANG alert jets went supersonic?


I think the F-15 is combat limited to 1.78m. I THINK. I've been wrong before. :thumb:
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Design & Construction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest