Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Belesarius

Bash the F-35 thred.

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Furry bullshit detected.

It's a bit more even-handed than I expected.

 

The two things that really break the case for the Spit are, IMHO, the fact that a lot of the sneaky stuff that worked on, say, Me262s (loitering by the airfield, for instance) simply will not work in a world where MANPADs and radar-guided guns are common.

 

The second issue is that the F-35 smacking down 10 spits in a single engagement isn't a one-time event. Tomorrow they will come on over and do it again. And again. And again, untl your 576 spitfires (and their expensive pilots) are all gone.

 

Air superioriy needs a credible way to bring down other aircraft, or all you buy with your cheap-and-cheerful airforce is a rapidly-diminishing operational capablity and a broken organisation.

 

Now if the spitfires had a decent missile strapped to their underbellies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Toxn said:

It's a bit more even-handed than I expected.

 

The two things that really break the case for the Spit are, IMHO, the fact that a lot of the sneaky stuff that worked on, say, Me262s (loitering by the airfield, for instance) simply will not work in a world where MANPADs and radar-guided guns are common.

 

The second issue is that the F-35 smacking down 10 spits in a single engagement isn't a one-time event. Tomorrow they will come on over and do it again. And again. And again, untl your 576 spitfires (and their expensive pilots) are all gone.

 

Air superioriy needs a credible way to bring down other aircraft, or all you buy with your cheap-and-cheerful airforce is a rapidly-diminishing operational capablity and a broken organisation.

 

Now if the spitfires had a decent missile strapped to their underbellies...

 

Launching a BVR missile from something with no radar sounds hilarious and very responsible.

 

Combat within visual range would fit better with the rules of war, but then you need to get within visual range of a F-35 when you're in a spit with no radar. Also, a sidewinder would add 2.5x to the cost for a spit that the furry is working from (assuming that the electronics to light the fuse come free, and all the electronics needed to support the missile, and the power to support the missile). Once you start adding stuff like a functional radar and the cost of supporting the aircraft, I bet the maths ends up looking like  1 F-35 vs 1.5 F-16's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Xlucine said:

 

Launching a BVR missile from something with no radar sounds hilarious and very responsible.

 

Combat within visual range would fit better with the rules of war, but then you need to get within visual range of a F-35 when you're in a spit with no radar. Also, a sidewinder would add 2.5x to the cost for a spit that the furry is working from (assuming that the electronics to light the fuse come free, and all the electronics needed to support the missile, and the power to support the missile). Once you start adding stuff like a functional radar and the cost of supporting the aircraft, I bet the maths ends up looking like  1 F-35 vs 1.5 F-16's

Don't ruin this, bro - we can totally convince some idiot to go around punting mustangs with AIM-9s taped to the wingtips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the most amazing things about WW2 to me is how the US went instantly into total war production and turned out tanks, planes and ships at astonishing rate. I'm sure everyone knows that no cars were made in the US between 41-45 since every car factory was making materiel. So my question is, would such a transformation of industrial output be possible today? I know it's different because of the relative strengths of the US military in 1941 and 2017, but assuming we had to fight some sort of peer-level existential war against, I don't know, space aliens, is manufacturing infrastructure and modern war materiel too specialized to make that kind of switch? Toyota plants making F-35s?

 

Quote

Our F-35 plants can barely make F-35s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F-16.net has an interesting discussion of special low-observability features of the F135 engine.

 

Looking at some videos of F-35s launching from carriers, and a few off-hand remarks from Pratt and Whitney spokesmen seem to show that the afterburner spraybars of the F135 are designed to block radar waves.  The turbines of the engine are not visible from directly behind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be perfectly fair, all that shows is that the F-35 is really heavy and that it has a ginormous fuel fraction (and has an engine to match the weight).  If you hang the same A2A loadout on an SU-27 and a MiG-29, of course the SU-27 is going to come off looking better.  An ordnance loadout that's a boat anchor for a MiG-29 barely bothers an SU-27.  Same deal with the Super Bug and the Viper vs. Stubby.  The F-35 is very nearly an F-15-sized aircraft, so a heavy load for an F-16 is a pretty moderate load for an F-35.

 

What would be more interesting is if they had figures for drag coefficients with those loads.  The internal weapons carriage should allow the F-35 to get way ahead in that measure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Collimatrix said:

An ordnance loadout that's a boat anchor for a MiG-29 barely bothers an SU-27.

 

This is essentially the point of the graph, it was part of a debate with someone who wanted to claim an F-16 had a better t/w ratio at 100% fuel than an F-35 at 50% fuel while not taking into account what that actually means for the payload each aircraft was carrying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Google translate of a Greek article.

 

The F-35A's overwhelming superiority was recorded in some of the most epic avant-garde fights in NATO history when the USAF fighter met for the Atlantic Trident (April 12-18), French Rafale fighters and British Eurofighter Typhoon , some results from which they began to leak. The F-22 fighters of the USAF also participated in the exercise. The score was overwhelmingly in favor of US fighters, of course the 5th generation, but the issue for the Greek side is not how the European fighters behaved against the F-22, but against the F-35, as in six months "tired" Mirage 2000 and F-16 third generation, PA will have to face the Turkish F-35A. The result was 18-0 against Rafale and 19-0 against Eurofighter and 16-1 against the F-15E. Rafale and Eurofighter were fired by AIM-120 long before they realized there was an enemy in a shotfield. The AP-81, the F-35 radar tracking track at distances over 230 km of locking at distances over 150 km and firing at the AIM-120 firing range with the Anglo-American fighters, literally did not know "from which came "! They never reached distances of less than 30 km and when all the English-style fighters did it, they were destroyed! All of this from an aircraft that was not designed as an airborne aircraft against aircraft designed as airborne aircraft (let's say Airflight was emphasized in Rafale), but it has now shown that the 4th of the 5th generation separates it real chaos, as it is not just the stealth features, it is also the electronic systems that give the overwhelming avant-garde. It was impressed that neither Eurofighter's IRST system was useful, as the F-35's shots were out of range. In the exercises F-15E fighters took part with the enemy forces and they had the same luck. The question then is how do some people in Greece consider spending an enormous amount (1 billion initially and up to 3 billion dollars later) to upgrade old F-16s that, because they will acquire AESA radar, will be able to articulate "Dissuasive" reason against the hordes of the Turkish F-35! When the senior Rafale and Eurofighter are presumed to "eat wildwood" from the USAF fighters, which even - and this has its significance - do not even have a complete flight envelope, as it is believed that the fighter is still evolving!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×