F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

[HenryBHough]

Why all the bullshit when we all know the next war will be fought with infrastructure destruction via the internet and the occasional nuke plunging out of orbit.

 

[DrainBamage]

Why all the bullshit when we all know the next war will be fought with infrastructure destruction via the internet and the occasional nuke plunging out of orbit.

Your pet theories are not the equivalent of "we all know" even if it makes you feel good to think assume everyone agrees with you.

 

[DrainBamage]

Spain’s Air Force and Navy have sights set on new American fighter aircraft


After investing €10.6 billion on the European fighter plane, it turns out that Spain’s future military aircraft will in all likelihood be American-made. The Spanish Air Force and Navy have their sights set on the F-35 Lightning II joint strike fighter, made by Lockheed Martin, to replace the F-18s and vertical take-off Harriers that will be decommissioned halfway through the next decade. An estimated 45 to 50 aircraft will be required for the Spanish Air Force and another 12 to 15 for the Navy. The program could represent spending of over €6 billion, and more than double that considering the logistical support required to keep the aircraft operational.


This is on top of Denmark's commitment last year and Germany looking at F-35 to replace their Tornadoes. Strange, I could have sworn there was some faux expert in here *cough* manonthestreet *cough* talking about international partners dropping like flies.

 

[DrainBamage]

Sounds like Naval version is in real trouble...landing gear needs full rework.....Trump can go Jerry Ford and veto and tweet away......they'll never hold up under the pressure. I wold only buy the Marine version and some for AF.....not a great many just enough to keep up with retirements.....Ad in some of the F-15s we sell to others that are better than ours and move on to next design.......

As with just about everything you've posted in this thread, reality has not agreed with your amateurish dire prognostications. According to info from the 2017 Tailhook Symposium the adjustment to holdback bar tension has resolved pilot experiences with catapult. Final results haven't been officially announced since they are still wrapping up testing on USS Lincoln but sounds like the change to HBB solves it.

So much for "real trouble", "full rework", please next time just type "I'm a naive drama queen" and be done with it.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The biggest additions to weapons in 3F includes support for AIM-9X for air to air, and SDB for ground attack.

F-35A with 3i software cannot pull 9Gs, that comes in block 3F.

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

 

[Hossfly]

I live 2 miles from Lockheed-Martin and the Naval Air Station. When I go on post to the BX and Commissary, all the pilots I've talked to rave about how good the F-35 is.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The biggest additions to weapons in 3F includes support for AIM-9X for air to air, and SDB for ground attack.

F-35A with 3i software cannot pull 9Gs, that comes in block 3F.

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

I'd request that you check on Navy/Marines not wearing G-Suits. When I was flying in the Navy (E-2, EP-3, and ES-3) I know I say Fighter Jocks wearing G-Suits.


>>>>

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The biggest additions to weapons in 3F includes support for AIM-9X for air to air, and SDB for ground attack.

F-35A with 3i software cannot pull 9Gs, that comes in block 3F.

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

I'd request that you check on Navy/Marines not wearing G-Suits. When I was flying in the Navy (E-2, EP-3, and ES-3) I know I say Fighter Jocks wearing G-Suits.


>>>>

I talked to people that got check rides in the 2 seater F-18s and the Pilots didn't wear G-suits. I have been on a number of USAF check rides and the G-suit was required as well as some training just to sit second seat. The Navy also requires that small amount of training. But the G suits weren't present in the F-18s for the reasons I gave. I have also seen celebrity Check Rides in the F-18 and the grunt method was used instead of a G suit.

Blue Angels https://www.blueangels.navy.mil/faq/

But I will admit it's been a few years since I seriously looked at the normal F-18 pilots. It looks like you are right except for the Blue Angels.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I talked to people that got check rides in the 2 seater F-18s and the Pilots didn't wear G-suits. I have been on a number of USAF check rides and the G-suit was required as well as some training just to sit second seat. The Navy also requires that small amount of training. But the G suits weren't present in the F-18s for the reasons I gave. I have also seen celebrity Check Rides in the F-18 and the grunt method was used instead of a G suit.

Blue Angels https://www.blueangels.navy.mil/faq/

But I will admit it's been a few years since I seriously looked at the normal F-18 pilots. It looks like you are right except for the Blue Angels.

Saying that G-suits are not worn for check rides or by demonstrators in the F-18 is different than saying that Navy/Marines don't where G-suits in flights for combat training or in actual combat.


I think you will find that they wear G-suits today like they did years ago when I was a Naval Aviator (backend E-2, EP-3, and ES-3 platforms).


>>>>>

 

[westwall]

The biggest additions to weapons in 3F includes support for AIM-9X for air to air, and SDB for ground attack.

F-35A with 3i software cannot pull 9Gs, that comes in block 3F.

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

I'd request that you check on Navy/Marines not wearing G-Suits. When I was flying in the Navy (E-2, EP-3, and ES-3) I know I say Fighter Jocks wearing G-Suits.


>>>>

I talked to people that got check rides in the 2 seater F-18s and the Pilots didn't wear G-suits. I have been on a number of USAF check rides and the G-suit was required as well as some training just to sit second seat. The Navy also requires that small amount of training. But the G suits weren't present in the F-18s for the reasons I gave. I have also seen celebrity Check Rides in the F-18 and the grunt method was used instead of a G suit.

Blue Angels https://www.blueangels.navy.mil/faq/

But I will admit it's been a few years since I seriously looked at the normal F-18 pilots. It looks like you are right except for the Blue Angels.

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

Switlik - CSU-15A/P U.S. Navy & Marine Corps Anti-G Suit - Military

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The biggest additions to weapons in 3F includes support for AIM-9X for air to air, and SDB for ground attack.

F-35A with 3i software cannot pull 9Gs, that comes in block 3F.

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

I'd request that you check on Navy/Marines not wearing G-Suits. When I was flying in the Navy (E-2, EP-3, and ES-3) I know I say Fighter Jocks wearing G-Suits.


>>>>

I talked to people that got check rides in the 2 seater F-18s and the Pilots didn't wear G-suits. I have been on a number of USAF check rides and the G-suit was required as well as some training just to sit second seat. The Navy also requires that small amount of training. But the G suits weren't present in the F-18s for the reasons I gave. I have also seen celebrity Check Rides in the F-18 and the grunt method was used instead of a G suit.

Blue Angels https://www.blueangels.navy.mil/faq/

But I will admit it's been a few years since I seriously looked at the normal F-18 pilots. It looks like you are right except for the Blue Angels.

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

Switlik - CSU-15A/P U.S. Navy & Marine Corps Anti-G Suit - Military

The Navy Blue Angles don't and never have. Read my previous quote.

 

[Hossfly]

The biggest additions to weapons in 3F includes support for AIM-9X for air to air, and SDB for ground attack.

F-35A with 3i software cannot pull 9Gs, that comes in block 3F.

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

I'd request that you check on Navy/Marines not wearing G-Suits. When I was flying in the Navy (E-2, EP-3, and ES-3) I know I say Fighter Jocks wearing G-Suits.


>>>>

I talked to people that got check rides in the 2 seater F-18s and the Pilots didn't wear G-suits. I have been on a number of USAF check rides and the G-suit was required as well as some training just to sit second seat. The Navy also requires that small amount of training. But the G suits weren't present in the F-18s for the reasons I gave. I have also seen celebrity Check Rides in the F-18 and the grunt method was used instead of a G suit.

Blue Angels https://www.blueangels.navy.mil/faq/

But I will admit it's been a few years since I seriously looked at the normal F-18 pilots. It looks like you are right except for the Blue Angels.

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

Switlik - CSU-15A/P U.S. Navy & Marine Corps Anti-G Suit - Military

The Navy Blue Angles don't and never have. Read my previous quote.

Check with williepete . He was a Navy pilot.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The Navy Blue Angles don't and never have. Read my previous quote.

The Navy Blue Angles, as a performance squadron, are not combat pilots training for combat missions or pilots in deploying squadrons for combat missions. Whether they wear G-Suits is irrelevant to your previous post that Navy/Marine Corps fighter pilots don't where G-Suits.

It's like saying that because the ceremonial guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier doesn't carry an M-4 that Army Infantry does not carry the M-4.

Why is it so difficult for you to support your claim about combat Navy/Marine pilots flying combat missions?

>>>>

 

[williepete]

Check with williepete . He was a Navy pilot

Air Force Hoss. Air Force. F-4s and A-10s. (I know who my parents are so I was disqualified from joining the Navy or Marine Corps).

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

^^^ANYONE^^^ It's as mandatory as a helmet, fire retardant flight suit/gloves, survival pack and parachute.
Why is this even a discussion topic? Oh, yeah. It's Daryl. The desk jockey who knows jack squat about flying or pulling G's.

Howdy Hoss. You tagged me on this thread so I responded out of my utmost respect for you. I otherwise avoid Daryl's Dementia.

Let's plan another get together of the local USMB'ers. I've got a few free passes to a local flight museum and a buddy who can get us into some hangars where the public can't go. Let me know a week or two in advance and I'll take myself off the schedule at the training center. Cheers, WP

 

[westwall]

The biggest additions to weapons in 3F includes support for AIM-9X for air to air, and SDB for ground attack.

F-35A with 3i software cannot pull 9Gs, that comes in block 3F.

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

I'd request that you check on Navy/Marines not wearing G-Suits. When I was flying in the Navy (E-2, EP-3, and ES-3) I know I say Fighter Jocks wearing G-Suits.


>>>>

I talked to people that got check rides in the 2 seater F-18s and the Pilots didn't wear G-suits. I have been on a number of USAF check rides and the G-suit was required as well as some training just to sit second seat. The Navy also requires that small amount of training. But the G suits weren't present in the F-18s for the reasons I gave. I have also seen celebrity Check Rides in the F-18 and the grunt method was used instead of a G suit.

Blue Angels https://www.blueangels.navy.mil/faq/

But I will admit it's been a few years since I seriously looked at the normal F-18 pilots. It looks like you are right except for the Blue Angels.

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

Switlik - CSU-15A/P U.S. Navy & Marine Corps Anti-G Suit - Military

The Navy Blue Angles don't and never have. Read my previous quote.

Which is true, nor do they wear O2 masks during their performances. They feel the G-suits will interfere with their ultra precise stick movements and cause an accident. They also tend to fly the oldest airframes in the inventory so are G-limited due to that consideration.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It is set with the 3I at 7.5gs. Not a real big deal since once the turn begins, even the F-16 has to back off to 7.0gs. If you try and pull 9 gees continuous a Red Out becomes a factor but you back it off after the initial hard bank (we are talking seconds) you pilot will come out of the redout as soon as you back it off to around 7 gees.. Take it to 10Gs or more and it's a blackout condition and you will be flying it into the ground cecause the pilot is out cold. Even though the F-4E was rated for 12 gees, the pilots couldn't really use it. Start the turn at 9.5 and back it off to around 7 gees. The USAF uses gee suits and can take advantage of the initial 9+g initial turn. But the Navy and Marines don't use then and usually operate at between 6 and 7 gees and it takes one hell of a human to do that.

The reason the Navy doesn't use g suits is that it would take away their concentration when they are making a carrier landing.During the flyoffs, the YF-16 and the YF-17 were very close in their performance. The YF-16 barely aced out the 17. When they made the YF-17 for carrier duty it got a lot heavier, shorter range and the F-16 now outperformed the F-18 for load, range. The SU-33 version for the carrier has the same problem the SU-30 that is not carrier qualified.

Unless Navy and Marine pilots start wearing G Suits, they will stay limited to between 6 and 7 gees. Maybe they might start because of the help the F-35C gives in landing.

I'd request that you check on Navy/Marines not wearing G-Suits. When I was flying in the Navy (E-2, EP-3, and ES-3) I know I say Fighter Jocks wearing G-Suits.


>>>>

I talked to people that got check rides in the 2 seater F-18s and the Pilots didn't wear G-suits. I have been on a number of USAF check rides and the G-suit was required as well as some training just to sit second seat. The Navy also requires that small amount of training. But the G suits weren't present in the F-18s for the reasons I gave. I have also seen celebrity Check Rides in the F-18 and the grunt method was used instead of a G suit.

Blue Angels https://www.blueangels.navy.mil/faq/

But I will admit it's been a few years since I seriously looked at the normal F-18 pilots. It looks like you are right except for the Blue Angels.

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

Switlik - CSU-15A/P U.S. Navy & Marine Corps Anti-G Suit - Military

The Navy Blue Angles don't and never have. Read my previous quote.

Which is true, nor do they wear O2 masks during their performances. They feel the G-suits will interfere with their ultra precise stick movements and cause an accident. They also tend to fly the oldest airframes in the inventory so are G-limited due to that consideration.

Did anyone feel the earth shake and the lights flicker off for a second? Is this a world threatening condition? We actually agreed to something. Time to wake up. It's obviously a nightmare.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Check with williepete . He was a Navy pilot

Air Force Hoss. Air Force. F-4s and A-10s. (I know who my parents are so I was disqualified from joining the Navy or Marine Corps).

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

^^^ANYONE^^^ It's as mandatory as a helmet, fire retardant flight suit/gloves, survival pack and parachute.
Why is this even a discussion topic? Oh, yeah. It's Daryl. The desk jockey who knows jack squat about flying or pulling G's.

Howdy Hoss. You tagged me on this thread so I responded out of my utmost respect for you. I otherwise avoid Daryl's Dementia.

Let's plan another get together of the local USMB'ers. I've got a few free passes to a local flight museum and a buddy who can get us into some hangars where the public can't go. Let me know a week or two in advance and I'll take myself off the schedule at the training center. Cheers, WP

This "Desk Jockey" was involved in the Wiesbauten (sp) War Games for the Soviet Air Force team. We reduced Nato to USAF A-10 that couldn't cross the channel and what was left of the Carrier Birds not lost in the first 3 days of the fight. Both sides were pretty much left with older "Junk" aircraft. Mostly Attack Birds. Tactics and numbers win almost every time. The only real rule we had was that whatever plan we presented before the games actually started, we had to stick with. Nato could adapt without notice. What they didn't know was we were Gamers. We had already ran that same scenario many times and we presented the one that worked the best. The Soviets lost not because of air power. We lost because they kept making silly rules that always placed the Ground Soviets in the worst light. In otherwords, like the Japanese for Midway, they cheated to win. I still believe the reason we were successful was the arrogance of the pilots. We had already convinced our Wing King that was a problem at our own base. He made corrections to eliminate that. One of the fixes was not to send any pilots to the games until it was corrected. It got corrected even before we returned. What surprised the Wing King was, we taught him the game and then he was taken out by an A-7 with him flying a fully loaded F15A. Of course, if that scenario had been real, returning the A-7 to the base was......well...... Ever seen the way that one fighter was brought back to the Carrier in Hot Shots? The Soviet equivalent was the SU-7 and the Soviet Bloc had more than a thousand of them.

The A-10 pilots learned quickly that almost any Soviet Attack bird could take out an A-10 almost 100% of the time by knowing how to fly against it. We learned using the A-7 on A-10 scenario. Missile on Missile both remains about the same. But when the missiles are gone, it becomes a gun on gun. The A-7 wins almost every time. I bet you don't know why. Now, substitute SU-7 for A-7.

Now, about why the F-18 has a problem of hard maneuvering. It's stick is between the legs. When making a series of turns to the right, the inflated bag on the leg gets in the way which limits it's roll rate. Plus, the F-18 is rated only at 7.5Gs due to it's weight. I imagine that some pilots can ring out more than that. I have heard that some pilots can ring out 8+gs. But in an Air to Air climate, the land based fighters will be able to initially use more than 9. Pulling 7+gs does require a G suit. The Blue Angles don't go over about 6.5. The F-18 is not that good as a Air to Air against other fighters as an aircraft. What has made it so successful in Air to Air has been the nutz banging on the control stick. Once that initial turn is started NO Fighter will be much over 7.5gs for pilots survivability. Sorry, there super troop but you can't change physics no matter how arrogant you get.

As I stated, during my time, the Navy did NOT us G suits in the F-18A/Bs because the Pilots could handle it better on a carrier landing than with a G suit. But times do change and the landing got a lot safer due to the birds being better and the IFLOLS being better.

Today, if a F-18E were to go into a harsh turning and burn it would be at a disadvantage to the F-16/F-15/Mig-29 or the SU-27. A "Pilot" can make up for that, maybe. As long as the other guy doesn't do the same. Like USAF, the Navy has a lot of high time flyers that are well trained. The Russians and Chinese have fewer. Or at least we hope so (don't get too full of yourself as you won't know who the hell is on the other side).

Remember, Super Pilot, not everything you learned was learned by another pilot. Sometimes, an Analyst who may or may not be a flyer spend countless hours going over YOUR data over and over to find out what the hell really happened and how to make your life last longer.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The Navy Blue Angles don't and never have. Read my previous quote.

The Navy Blue Angles, as a performance squadron, are not combat pilots training for combat missions or pilots in deploying squadrons for combat missions. Whether they wear G-Suits is irrelevant to your previous post that Navy/Marine Corps fighter pilots don't where G-Suits.

It's like saying that because the ceremonial guard at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier doesn't carry an M-4 that Army Infantry does not carry the M-4.

Why is it so difficult for you to support your claim about combat Navy/Marine pilots flying combat missions?

>>>>

I already admitted to that error. I bet you were always on the top of the dog pile and never in the middle. I was never in the dog pile. Not the middle, top or bottom without a few getting seriously injured.

 

[westwall]

Check with williepete . He was a Navy pilot

Air Force Hoss. Air Force. F-4s and A-10s. (I know who my parents are so I was disqualified from joining the Navy or Marine Corps).

Anyone flying a high performance aircraft wears a G-suit.

^^^ANYONE^^^ It's as mandatory as a helmet, fire retardant flight suit/gloves, survival pack and parachute.
Why is this even a discussion topic? Oh, yeah. It's Daryl. The desk jockey who knows jack squat about flying or pulling G's.

Howdy Hoss. You tagged me on this thread so I responded out of my utmost respect for you. I otherwise avoid Daryl's Dementia.

Let's plan another get together of the local USMB'ers. I've got a few free passes to a local flight museum and a buddy who can get us into some hangars where the public can't go. Let me know a week or two in advance and I'll take myself off the schedule at the training center. Cheers, WP

This "Desk Jockey" was involved in the Wiesbauten (sp) War Games for the Soviet Air Force team. We reduced Nato to USAF A-10 that couldn't cross the channel and what was left of the Carrier Birds not lost in the first 3 days of the fight. Both sides were pretty much left with older "Junk" aircraft. Mostly Attack Birds. Tactics and numbers win almost every time. The only real rule we had was that whatever plan we presented before the games actually started, we had to stick with. Nato could adapt without notice. What they didn't know was we were Gamers. We had already ran that same scenario many times and we presented the one that worked the best. The Soviets lost not because of air power. We lost because they kept making silly rules that always placed the Ground Soviets in the worst light. In otherwords, like the Japanese for Midway, they cheated to win. I still believe the reason we were successful was the arrogance of the pilots. We had already convinced our Wing King that was a problem at our own base. He made corrections to eliminate that. One of the fixes was not to send any pilots to the games until it was corrected. It got corrected even before we returned. What surprised the Wing King was, we taught him the game and then he was taken out by an A-7 with him flying a fully loaded F15A. Of course, if that scenario had been real, returning the A-7 to the base was......well...... Ever seen the way that one fighter was brought back to the Carrier in Hot Shots? The Soviet equivalent was the SU-7 and the Soviet Bloc had more than a thousand of them.

The A-10 pilots learned quickly that almost any Soviet Attack bird could take out an A-10 almost 100% of the time by knowing how to fly against it. We learned using the A-7 on A-10 scenario. Missile on Missile both remains about the same. But when the missiles are gone, it becomes a gun on gun. The A-7 wins almost every time. I bet you don't know why. Now, substitute SU-7 for A-7.

Now, about why the F-18 has a problem of hard maneuvering. It's stick is between the legs. When making a series of turns to the right, the inflated bag on the leg gets in the way which limits it's roll rate. Plus, the F-18 is rated only at 7.5Gs due to it's weight. I imagine that some pilots can ring out more than that. I have heard that some pilots can ring out 8+gs. But in an Air to Air climate, the land based fighters will be able to initially use more than 9. Pulling 7+gs does require a G suit. The Blue Angles don't go over about 6.5. The F-18 is not that good as a Air to Air against other fighters as an aircraft. What has made it so successful in Air to Air has been the nutz banging on the control stick. Once that initial turn is started NO Fighter will be much over 7.5gs for pilots survivability. Sorry, there super troop but you can't change physics no matter how arrogant you get.

As I stated, during my time, the Navy did NOT us G suits in the F-18A/Bs because the Pilots could handle it better on a carrier landing than with a G suit. But times do change and the landing got a lot safer due to the birds being better and the IFLOLS being better.

Today, if a F-18E were to go into a harsh turning and burn it would be at a disadvantage to the F-16/F-15/Mig-29 or the SU-27. A "Pilot" can make up for that, maybe. As long as the other guy doesn't do the same. Like USAF, the Navy has a lot of high time flyers that are well trained. The Russians and Chinese have fewer. Or at least we hope so (don't get too full of yourself as you won't know who the hell is on the other side).

Remember, Super Pilot, not everything you learned was learned by another pilot. Sometimes, an Analyst who may or may not be a flyer spend countless hours going over YOUR date over and over to find out what the hell really happened and how to make your life last longer.

The only time the Naval aviators don't use their G-suits is if they are flying with the Blues. All other times they wear them. ALL of them. I spend a lot of time out at Fallon NAS and I can guarantee you they are ALL wearing them.

 

[williepete]

This "Desk Jockey" was involved in the Wiesbauten (sp) War Games for the Soviet Air Force team. We reduced Nato to USAF A-10 that couldn't cross the channel and what was left of the Carrier Birds not lost in the first 3 days of the fight....

This is why I don't respond to your delusional threads. You are bat shit crazy. You live in a fantasy world. In your fantasy world, games are reality. I responded to this thread to answer my good friend Hossfly. And you went tripping over the edge once again.