good thing dogfights are basically a thing of the past. if the F35 lost a missile engagement, then i'd be extremely concerned.
June 30, 2015
F35 loses to 1970's era F16 carrying weights in a dogfight
air force, airplanes, future weapons, geopolitics, military, technology, united states, world
There is a report from a F35 test pilot in a report obtained by War is Boring's David Axe.
A single-seat F-35A with the designation “AF-02” — one of the older JSFs (Joint Strike Fighters) in the Air Force — took off alongside a two-seat F-16D Block 40, one of the types of planes the F-35 is supposed to replace.
The F-35 was flying “clean,” with no weapons in its bomb bay or under its wings and fuselage. The F-16, by contrast, was hauling two bulky underwing drop tanks, putting the older jet at an aerodynamic disadvantage.
But the JSF’s advantage didn’t actually help in the end. The stealth fighter proved too sluggish to reliably defeat the F-16, even with the F-16 lugging extra fuel tanks. “Even with the limited F-16 target configuration, the F-35A remained at a distinct energy disadvantage for every engagement,” the pilot reported.
“Insufficient pitch rate.” “Energy deficit to the bandit would increase over time.” “The flying qualities in the blended region (20–26 degrees AoA) were not intuitive or favorable.”
The F-35 jockey tried to target the F-16 with the stealth jet’s 25-millimeter cannon, but the smaller F-16 easily dodged. “Instead of catching the bandit off-guard by rapidly pull aft to achieve lead, the nose rate was slow, allowing him to easily time his jink prior to a gun solution,” the JSF pilot complained.
The F-35 — the only new fighter jet that America and most of its allies are developing — is demonstrably inferior in a dogfight with the F-16, which the U.S. Air Force first acquired in the late 1970s.
The test pilot explained that he has also flown 1980s-vintage F-15E fighter-bombers and found the F-35 to be “substantially inferior” to the older plane when it comes to managing energy in a close battle.
- F35 program costing a trillion dollars
The best option for an F35 pilot in a dogfight is the ejection seat.
- F35 program costing a trillion dollars
The best option for an F35 pilot in a dogfight is the ejection seat.
Heh, I just read that the F35 only carries 120 rounds for its gun. That's five 0.5 second bursts...
The F-35 is still cheaper than the F-22, which is most likely why it won out. I'm guessing the USAF is betting that its stealth capabilities will help it avoid dogfighting all together.
Apparently the last dogfight the US was involved in was in the 1999 Kosovo War. Most pilots don't want to get involved in direct combat. Now has the US really been facing any enemies with any serious areal warfare capabilities. Fighters have largely shifted to ground attack rolls over the last few decades. So dogfighting capability doesn't matter as much as it used to.
Not that it makes up for the F-35 being what it is. For such an expensive hunk of junk, I'm surprised it wasn't German engineered.
The F-35 is still cheaper than the F-22, which is most likely why it won out. I'm guessing the USAF is betting that its stealth capabilities will help it avoid dogfighting all together.
Apparently the last dogfight the US was involved in was in the 1999 Kosovo War. Most pilots don't want to get involved in direct combat.......
I can't imagine an enemy fighter ever getting within visual range of an f35 undetected in the first place. How likely is a visual dogfight scenario considering the f35s ability to detect and identify the enemy at extreme distances.
We just need to train the B-52 pilots in dogfighting. I'd go to an airshow to see that.
the same is happening in Italy, they promised them to build the wings in a factory in the south (it's a poor area) and now people keep trying to justify wasting money on this plane instead of going with the european program (that would feed european companies) only because of that damn factory, that provides no useful technology transfer but these people are stuck in the 60s with the glory of national car manufacturing in mind and completely ignore the importance of knowledge economy.But pieces of it are made in almost every state, making it impossible to kill.
I can't imagine an enemy fighter ever getting within visual range of an f35 undetected in the first place. How likely is a visual dogfight scenario considering the f35s ability to detect and identify the enemy at extreme distances.
They should just keep retrofitting existing airframes and work on lowering costs and integrating remote control.
Who cares if we send up 20 state of the art planes costing 200 million each when we could send up 200 older frames sans pilots being controlled like a swarm.
They need to invest in more tech for AWACS and make cruise missles cheaper.
Really cheap cruise missles and drones would extend our ability over entire regions instead of playing whack a mole.
Simulations are playing this out and the establishment keeps digging their heels.
Procurement process sucks and will keep sucking as long as senators have a say.
Maybe a bit higher off the ground next time.
Gents,
I've got first-hand knowledge on this, please allow me to interject a little factual info:
F-35 was, first and foremost, an EXPORTABLE fifth generation fighter. Raptor was most definitely NOT going to be approved for FMS, nor should it have been. (Good political decision, that.) F-35 was sold as almost as capable for half the cost of Raptor. (I'll take issue with the "almost" bit of that. And back in 2009, it was supposed to be cheaper.)
The F-35 is not an air superiority aircraft, it's a stealthy bomb truck with self defense capabilities. Adding the STOVL requirement drove design compromises which hinder the "A" and "C" significantly. The Navy is pretty much on record saying they'd rather not buy a single "C" and just keep building F-18E/F's. (BTW, if you think an F-18E/F bears ANYTHING in common with the F-18C/D, think again...)
Manimal, there's been lot's of discussion about various robot/drone air armada type fleets for a while now. Consider, however, how easy is it to jam that control signal? Remember, you're not jamming the _source_ of the signal, you'd be jamming the receptors' antenna...
All that said, the F-35 isn't a bad airplane, it's built for a specific set of requirements.
Flay the requirements all you want...
That would be the issue. It was billed as the be-all-end-all fighter of the future for the entire US military and many of its allies. As it stands the Navy has all but rejected it, the delays and cost overruns have effectively made it more expensive than the F-22, and the end is nowhere in sight.
Meanwhile the requirements seem to get more and more "specific", or rather "limited", as the years go by. The design is a failure given its original promises.
[/B]
this is what happens when you promise 3 planes for the cost of 1....whoever bought off on that promise was a retard.
The F-35 is not an air superiority aircraft, it's a stealthy bomb truck with self defense capabilities.
Then why the 'F' designation and not 'B?'