F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

[Daryl Hunt]

Radar has a range limit due to the curvature of the earth. It will be much further than line of sight but it's still affected. It's normally about 240 miles give or take. Ships have that problem when targeting. The Navy needs those eyes in the sky in order to exceed that range even if it's an E-2 or an EA-18G. The problem is, both of those are a bit vulnerable in comparison to the F-35B.

Sorry, you can't change Physics to suit yourself.

:Scratching Head:

What physics did I change to suit myself.

I noted that RADAR Horizon is a function of altitude. At about 100 feet above sea level RADAR Horizon is about 10 miles. At altitude we could "see" much farther. Our RADAR Horizon at altitude was about 250 miles for surface targets. For air-to-air targets (at altitude) curvature was less of a factor that PRF and sensitivity of the receiver.

.>>>>

You should have said that in the first place instead of just saying that I was wrong. In reality, I was right and you just admitted it. A Guided Missiles range is equal to the affective range of the Radar that guides it unless it is using internal radar or guidance. Using the F-35 for this mission isn't something new. The E-2 annd EA-18 has been used for this for quite some time. But the old ICUUCMe comes into play.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You should have said that in the first place instead of just saying that I was wrong. In reality, I was right and you just admitted it. A Guided Missiles range is equal to the affective range of the Radar that guides it unless it is using internal radar or guidance. Using the F-35 for this mission isn't something new. The E-2 annd EA-18 has been used for this for quite some time. But the old ICUUCMe comes into play.

Go back and read what I said without the hackles being up.

I clarified that there is a difference between how far a missile can fly and the ability to develop targeting information from ship based RADARS due to curvature. That aircraft provide over the horizon targeting because of altitude. Basically agreeing with what you wrote.
.
.
.
.>>>>

 

[Daryl Hunt]

You should have said that in the first place instead of just saying that I was wrong. In reality, I was right and you just admitted it. A Guided Missiles range is equal to the affective range of the Radar that guides it unless it is using internal radar or guidance. Using the F-35 for this mission isn't something new. The E-2 annd EA-18 has been used for this for quite some time. But the old ICUUCMe comes into play.

Go back and read what I said without the hackles being up.

I clarified that there is a difference between how far a missile can fly and the ability to develop targeting information from ship based RADARS due to curvature. That aircraft provide over the horizon targeting because of altitude. Basically agreeing with what you wrote.
.
.
.
.>>>>

Nuff said. We shouldn't be fighting in front of the child.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

You should have said that in the first place instead of just saying that I was wrong. In reality, I was right and you just admitted it. A Guided Missiles range is equal to the affective range of the Radar that guides it unless it is using internal radar or guidance. Using the F-35 for this mission isn't something new. The E-2 annd EA-18 has been used for this for quite some time. But the old ICUUCMe comes into play.

Go back and read what I said without the hackles being up.

I clarified that there is a difference between how far a missile can fly and the ability to develop targeting information from ship based RADARS due to curvature. That aircraft provide over the horizon targeting because of altitude. Basically agreeing with what you wrote.
.
.
.
.>>>>

You have to admit, using an E-2, EA-6 or an EA-18G to play chicken with against a ships radar takes some real kinds of special cojones.

 

[DrainBamage]

ok
list any combat accomplishments or magic shootdowns,,,,,

Perfect example of what we were talking about with you, every post is disingenuous like this.

Earlier in this thread you were praising the F-22, which at that time had zero combat accomplishments and definitely no magic shootdowns (whatever that means), yet here for the F-35 which you know full well has been flying combat missions in the Middle East you're demanding a lit of combat accomplishments as some new goalpost that must be crossed for the aircraft to be judged worthy.

Why do you think they want F-15s and F18s.....cause they know it cant do all of what was claimed, They wont say that,,,,,but if they were confident in it this wouldn't be happening,

Procurement issues related to F-35 running behind schedule, which is something entirely different then it can't do all of what was claimed.

If you're confident in what you're saying why don't you explain exactly what an F-18 can do that an F-35 cannot do? We all know you won't answer because you never stick around to defend your bullshit, with every post you further exemplify why you've become the laughing stock of this forum.

 

[DrainBamage]

F-35 cant do the same cause its not as stealthy....cant fly as high and has a blowtorch tail...…...

You prove my point about your logical disconnect.

1. You praised F-22's dominace, with your only evidence of it's performance in exercises.

2. F-35 has same gaudy kill ratios in exercises, with pilots from various services and different countries saying it dominates because it can't be seen... and your conclusion is that it can't dominate and isn't stealthy.

This is the logic chain of someone thinking with fanboyish emotion rather than common sense, you're like some college football fan screaming themselves hoarse at the TV in a bar rooting for the planes you like and cursing the planes you hate. Grow up.

*also I'd not you've been asked how the "blowtorch tail" compares in heat signature to other fighters at least a dozen times in this thread whenever you make the comment, and you have yet to provide any response. Reason = you have no idea what the IR signature of an F-35's tail is you're just continuing to parrot something you read in a blog somewhere.

 

[Manonthestreet]

F-35 is no F-22....not even close. Think Skepticism is warranted.

 

[DrainBamage]

F-35 is no F-22....not even close. Think Skepticism is warranted.

Please read again, I didn't ask whether F-35 is an F-22 so you're either having reading comprehension issues of (more likely) dodging the same questions. I'll try again, and I know you'll avoid answering again but it just serves to drive home the point about how you operate in here.

1. What can an F-18 do better than an F-35?
2. Did F-22 have combat experience when you were championing it a few years ago in this thread?
3. How does heat signature of F-35 compare to other aircraft?
4. Has F-35 dominated in Red Flag, just like F-22 has?
5. Has F-35 been performing hundreds of hours of combat missions dropping ordnance in Middle East?
6. Why do you say an F-35 isn't stealthy when combat pilots say it's big advantage has been you can't see it?

Start the crickets chirping for the child...

 

[DrainBamage]

F-35 cant do the same cause its not as stealthy.

Here is from latest Red Flag 2019 that wrapped up a couple months, source = Hill Airmen, F-35 a lethal combo at Red Flag

During the first week of Red Flag, the F-35 pilots flew in a larger force of Blue Air in a counter-air mission. More than 60 aggressor aircraft were flying against them, blinding many of the fourth-generation aircraft with “robust” electronic attack capabilities. “I’ve never seen anything like it before.” Wood said. “This is not a mission you want a young pilot flying in. My wingman was a brand new F-35A pilot, seven or eight flights out of training. He gets on the radio and tells an experienced, 3,000-hour pilot in a very capable fourth-generation aircraft. ‘Hey bud, you need to turn around. You’re about to die. There’s a threat off your nose.’” The young pilot then “killed” the enemy aircraft and had three more kills in the hour-long mission. “Even in this extremely challenging environment, the F-35 didn’t have many difficulties doing its job,” Wood said. ‘That’s a testament to the pilot’s training and the capabilities of the jet.”

So for you to continue to press on year after year claiming F-35 isn't stealthy you must believe that above is a complete fabrication. This guy is lying. There were also dozens of folks lying in previous Red Flag. Everyone is a liar year after year about F-35 being stealthy, because Manonthestreet who's never sat in the cockpit of an aircraft in his life keeps saying it isn't stealthy and can't fight. Norwegians are lying, Brits are lying, Marines are lying, everyone is in on the giant conspiracy.

It takes a colossal suspension of reality for you to keep this up Manonthestreet, like I said it's both sad and fascinating to see at the same time.

 

[Manonthestreet]

F-35 has hottest engine in fleet.....F18 will do ground support better simply cause it carries more.. Fact I would be surprised if an F-35 is ever tasked to do it simply because of cost differential in repairs. One reason I believe they are adding F-15s plus we dont have evough high altitude Fighters. F35 rcs is larger than F-22 marginally smaller than f-18

 

[Daryl Hunt]

F-35 is no F-22....not even close. Think Skepticism is warranted.

If we using stealth as a yardstick, the F-35A is better than the F-22 since it has a smaller stealth footprint. That means the F-35 will see the F-22 first and get first shots. What we are exporting ain't what we are flying in the US in the form of the F-35A and C. I don't know when they changed from the solid baked panels to the mesh panels but that's the way the US F-35s are made today. Why that is better, I don't know and they ain't tellin'.

The F-35A can now escort the B-2 all the way in and the F-22 can't.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

F-35 has hottest engine in fleet.....F18 will do ground support better simply cause it carries more.. Fact I would be surprised if an F-35 is ever tasked to do it simply because of cost differential in repairs. One reason I believe they are adding F-15s plus we dont have evough high altitude Fighters. F35 rcs is larger than F-22 marginally smaller than f-18

And exactly what is the RCS of the F-35A since they went to the Carbon Fiber Stealth Mesh? It's listed as the size of a mosquito from all angles now. As for tailpipe heat, it can go to zero energy and climb straight up without going afterburner. Try that with your F-18, F-15 or even your F-22. If you have to go afterburner then your heat signature goes right out the window. Plus, your Russian Buddies have to be within about 35 miles for their IR detectors to work. They start dodging missiles from the F-35 and F-22 long before that. And both the F-22 and F-35 will be using passive guidance so they will be very hard to pickup and impossible to target. Now, add the F-15X throwing Amramms into the mix without using their own radar as well with the F-35 guiding them in passively and your comrades are doing a whole lot more jinxing, diving, climbing, banking and turning and running. All your russian buddies know is that their buddies are blowing up and they are only getting a few seconds warning on their missile detectors.

So what if the F-35 has a not tailpipe in afterburner. It doesn't matter if it can outperform most fighters without using afterburner. It has a way over 1 to 1 thrust to weight factor now without afterburner in combat trim.

A F-35A cost per hour of operation is now at 13,000 bucks. A F-16 is sitting right at 16,000. The cost of the F-16 remains the same but the F-35A has gone down dramatically every year since it was put into operational service. It started out at about 40K it's first year in 2014 before it went operational. In 2015, when it went operations, it dropped because the spare parts and ground support was available. But for 2018, it's all the way down to under 14K making it one of the most cost effective fighters in the world. And the price this year will be right around 80Mil making it a real deal compared to most of the 4th gen fighters with capabilities not even close to the F-35A. Britain was going to buy only the F-35B but when they looked at the perfomance and savings of the A model, the converted about half of the orders to the A model.

Don't kid yourself, the A model is one mean little SOB and it operates on the cheap, flies multiple missions per day and is harder than hell to see. If you want to use your IR detectors, you need to get close, real close and be already under attack from it. And it's been proven that there are only a couple or three fighters that can dogfight with an A in combat trim and either equal it or exceed it. And that only includes the SU-35, F-22 and the F-5. That's pretty good company to be in, don't you think? It's one thing to test it where it's limited to only 6.5 Gees and another when it's set to 9+ Gees like the A is now. Add the Aim-9X and the helmet aimed off bore to that as well and even the SU-35 and the F-22 means that no one leaves the area alive.

If you question that I included the F-5, there is one model of the F-5 that can use the Aim-9X and the offbore helmet aiming sights and uses AESA radar. During the next Top Gun, the Navy will flying against that little motorscooter as agressors. And if you think a F-5 isn't one bad little MOF, it's been giving Red Flag Air Force fighters like the F-16, F-15 and even the F-22 fits (way back to the F-4) fits for decades. There is a good reason the Marines has all but said they would give a left nut to have a fleet of them. But it appears they have been satisfied with their F-35Bs instead. Not bad for a 3rd gen aircraft. Of course, the F-18 owes it's heritage to the F-5 lock stock and barrel.

What makes the F-35A so sought after? Performance, Cost, Cost per hour of operations, ease of maintenance, availability. Right now, they can't make enough of them. It sounds like more plants are going to have to be opened.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

F-35 cant do the same cause its not as stealthy....cant fly as high and has a blowtorch tail...…...

You prove my point about your logical disconnect.

1. You praised F-22's dominace, with your only evidence of it's performance in exercises.

2. F-35 has same gaudy kill ratios in exercises, with pilots from various services and different countries saying it dominates because it can't be seen... and your conclusion is that it can't dominate and isn't stealthy.

This is the logic chain of someone thinking with fanboyish emotion rather than common sense, you're like some college football fan screaming themselves hoarse at the TV in a bar rooting for the planes you like and cursing the planes you hate. Grow up.

*also I'd not you've been asked how the "blowtorch tail" compares in heat signature to other fighters at least a dozen times in this thread whenever you make the comment, and you have yet to provide any response. Reason = you have no idea what the IR signature of an F-35's tail is you're just continuing to parrot something you read in a blog somewhere.

I already pointed out that the new engines in the US A models have a better than a 1 to 1 thrust to weight ratio without afterburner. It can go from zero energy to straight up acceleration without afterburner. I don't know of any other Jet Fighter that can do that. It ends up having a cooler tailpipe doing high risk maneuvers than the other fighters that needs to use their afterburners to do the same maneuvers. In order for the other fighters to get that kind of performance, they are going to have to dump fuel and get rid of all their weapons. The F-35A does it carrying 50% fuel and all 6 missiles without afterburner.

 

[DrainBamage]

F-35 has hottest engine in flee

According to who? You've made this claim before but never provided a source despite being asked about a dozen times including about 2 posts ago. I suspect you won't answer because your source is yourself.

F18 will do ground support better simply cause it carries more..

This isn't true at all, do your research dude.
F-18 = 13,700 lbs
F-35 = 18,000 lbs
aIn any environment an F-18 can operate in with external stores an F-35 can do the same, it's would still be stealthier and have far better situational awareness.

Fighters. F35 rcs is larger than F-22 marginally smaller than f-18

Okay, nobody releases official RCS numbers but there are lots of RCS estimates floating around, below is from GlobalSecurity.org. Do you have a different source, or are you seriously so far gone that you consider an F-35 having RCS that is 1/200th the size of F-18 is best described as "marginally smaller".

Who told you F-35 is only marginally smaller RCS than F-18? That's an idiotic statement.

 

[DrainBamage]

1. What can an F-18 do better than an F-35?
2. Did F-22 have combat experience when you were championing it a few years ago in this thread?
3. How does heat signature of F-35 compare to other aircraft?
4. Has F-35 dominated in Red Flag, just like F-22 has?
5. Has F-35 been performing hundreds of hours of combat missions dropping ordnance in Middle East?
6. Why do you say an F-35 isn't stealthy when combat pilots say it's big advantage has been you can't see it?

Start the crickets chirping for the child...

So to keep track of what Manonthestreet has been able to sputter in response:

1. He answers ground support, based on false premise that F-18 can carry more ordnance. F-35 can carry more, has better situational awareness, wider combat radius.
2. He ignores
3. He ignores, just repeats unfounded claim it's hot while again refusing to provide a source or comparison to other aircraft.
4. He ignores
5. He ignores
6. He ignores

So again ManOnTheStreet shows he can make false statements but isn't much for standing up to scrutiny.

 

[DrainBamage]

Found it:

Love the F-22...it works and has 15-1 kill ratio

That's right, Manonthestreet is using F-22 Red Flag kill ratios to point out how well it works, while then ignoring similar from F-35 and demanding to know it's actual combat record. Never go full retard.

 

[Manonthestreet]

F-35 is no F-22....not even close. Think Skepticism is warranted.

If we using stealth as a yardstick, the F-35A is better than the F-22 since it has a smaller stealth footprint. That means the F-35 will see the F-22 first and get first shots. What we are exporting ain't what we are flying in the US in the form of the F-35A and C. I don't know when they changed from the solid baked panels to the mesh panels but that's the way the US F-35s are made today. Why that is better, I don't know and they ain't tellin'.

The F-35A can now escort the B-2 all the way in and the F-22 can't.

Not even ...don't know where you got that ...F22 rcs much smaller than f35

 

[DrainBamage]

Not even ...don't know where you got that ...F22 rcs much smaller than f35

So show us? You say a lot of stuff but sure are scant on actual sources for your bullshit, clearly your favorite source is yourself.

You say F-35 RCS is only marginally smaller than F-18, I find that to be absurd and challenge you to support it with facts. I know you won't, but we'll let that be another example of you shitting a lot of hot hair without having any ability to back any of it up.

 

[Manonthestreet]

F35 doesn't have range to escort any long range platform ....why Navy has alrdy started looking for it's replacement ....even before it's in the fleet in any numbers ...damning indictment

 

[Manonthestreet]

You're using legacy hornet rcs ...