http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/03/pentagon-vaunted-f-35-earns-lousy-review-from-test-pilot-in-secret-report/?intcmp=latestnews


lol

Dupe, and totally inaccurate.

A secret report that's being spewed about the internet?

Do you think this hasn't already been posted numerous times.

i searched

You failed

 

Ask a computer forensics expert why the term "F-35" is apparently unsearchable ...

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1763397_.html&page=4&anc=54399391#i54399391

It's usually the F-35 vs F-35A/B/C variations that make it hard to search for ... but in this case, I think it's just a flipper problem.

i thought it was JSF and Sylvan vs the world



 

How much dogfighting do we really expect to be doing?

Not surprising, with how my day's going.

7th gen fighters are so stealthy that missiles can't lock on.  So basically they patrol around until they stumble upon each other and then, bam, knife fight.

That's why they needed vstol, so the plane can hover and get a steadier shot on the bogeys.  Quicker firing solution.

Wonder how many more of these damn things we will have to endure?

It was a post in which an anti-F-35 blogger picked a few sentences from a multiple page report and twisted the comments to reflect his own views. The event in question wasn't a dogfight. It was a test to see how the F-35 performed in a very specific flight regime. It wasn't a situation in which both pilots went after each other in a fangs out attempt to defeat each other. This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion.

Here's what USMC Lt. Col. Matt Kelly (a guy who actually operates the F-35) had to say about the matter:



So for the billionth time, can we please put this garbage to rest? It is amazing the degree the haters go to in order to twist things out of context in an effort to make the F-35 look bad.

 
And I still get irritated when people laugh about this shit. As if America doesn't have threats out there that want to destroy us. What the fuck is the comedy in a reported weakness in our defenses? That's something that if anything, should piss you off and demand to have fixed.


 

Even though the "report" being cited is BS, I think it's disgusting that people laugh about this shit.

I'm a layman. Not a hater.

I could give a less of a fuck if it was successful or not. I just thought it was funny.

I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about the blogger who started all of this.

Copy.

So dumb this down for me, can this thing be an effective fighter in a dogfight, or is that not it's intended purpose?

Apparently you searched like a fourth gen fighter searching for an operational F35. They're out there, you just looked and didn't see them.

Search sucks on my iPhone.

BRAVO!

 

Just like a Russian radar.

It isn't a Raptor by any means, but it will be more than able to hold its own against pretty much anything else out there. That isn't to say that it couldn't get waxed by an F-16 in a mock dogfight. The F-16 is an incredibly capable dogfighter that in the right hands can defeat ANYTHING currently flying in the WVR (Within Visual Range) arena, even an F-22. In some regards, it may actually hold some advantages over the F-35 kinematically. The F-16 is an incredible machine. That said, the F-35 is not going to end up being the "turd" many of its detractors are claiming it will be. Performance wise, it should fit somewhere in between an F-16 and an F-18, combining some of the best attributes of both aircraft.

Where the F-35 really shines is having the ability to penetrate sophisticated, integrated air defense networks utilizing S-300 and S-400 type systems. Legacy aircraft like the F-16 or F-18 are pretty much going to be meat on the table in such an environment. The F-35 has the low observable characteristics that will allow it to get close enough to these things to take them out or to strike targets defended by them. It isn't invisible. But it will be much harder for the enemy to detect than any of our current strike aircraft. That little edge can mean the difference between life and death, as well as successful mission completion versus failure.

The F-35 isn't specifically designed to dogfight. Nor is the F-22. When it comes to raw performance and maneuverability, designers have about maxed out the potential of manned aircraft with 4th generation platforms like the F-16, Typhoon or Flanker series. You aren't going to be able to gain significant advantages over these aircraft in terms of performance simply because anything else goes beyond the limit of the pilots. So in order to gain an advantage, you have to look to other areas. That is where stealth and 5th generation technology comes into play. The F-22 and the F-35 are designed to kill the enemy before he can get close enough to detect or kill you. That is where 5th generation technology becomes a game changer.

So to answer your question, yes, the F-35 can and will be an effective dogfighter if the need arises. That said, the F-35 will seek to use its real advantages over opposing aircraft and kill them at distance before they can become a threat. Truthfully, an F-35 won't really offer that much of an advantage in a dogfight over existing designs like the F-16 or F-18 that has a HOBS missile capability. But it will certainly equal them in terms of performance in that type of fight, while being enormously superior in beyond visual range ait to air combat, or when going up against ground based air defenses. So overall that is a significant net gain in capability the F-35 delivers and as such, makes it more than a worthy replacement for legacy platforms.

Cool thanks for explaining that!

It's essentially the same type of problem an F-18 would have in a sustained turning fight with an F-16.  This is a known issue that goes all the way back to the JSF specification developed by the JPO.  In balancing all of the aspects of their spec, sustained turn wasn't as highly weighted as others.

Just a question....how many here have even flown a Viper or Hornet, or any other fighter for that matter?  I referring to the ones in GD that bloviate incessantly when the topic of aerial combat comes up.  It really is a valid question.  Playing on your xbox in mom's basement does not count btw.

Everyone knows 2-circle vs a Viper is bad news, configurations, LV placement, etc etc depending. Viper is a bad ass jet.

Yes, i know.  You're not a blow hard though.  Wondering about all those that spew forth multiple paragraphs of bullshit.

I know many a Viper pilot who became impatient or intimidated after the first 360 who made the mistake of getting below 300kts vs a hornet.  Hell when i flew the Hog i suckered a few Vipers into the very slow speed regime.  Did not end well for the young whipper snappers

 

Yeah, I've said in other threads but unless you see in person the nose authority of a Hornet or Suoerhornet, you can't appreciate it. If you have a gameplan against it, you can be successful, but a Hornet will shoot first a lot, especially when 9X and helmet equipped.  Of course, nose authority comes with a price......nothing like selling the farm for a shot, not getting it and watching the dude go up when you can just sit and watch (which is the young Hornet pilot tendency).

"Damn it Jim, I'm an doctor engineer, not a fighter pilot."

What's "2-circle" and LV?  

[ I've never had the wrist agility to converse effectively with fighter pilots.  Frustrated with the communication barrier with thermo-chimp, the pilots would sometimes just go back to their desk and send me a .ppt file with picture of the maneuvers to be analyzed. ]

All i will say is at the merge, the last guy or gal to turn sets the 1vs2 circle.  Vipers usually prefer 2 circle unless merging with baby seals....F4, Tornado, F-15E etc.  LV is lift vector, use God's G!

 

There is actually a great BFM book you can get at a bookstore, but the name is escaping me - I believe it is simply called Basic Fghter Maneuvering. It gives some history of visual fighting from WWI thru I believe Vietnam. It the best thing I've read that's not in the .mil side of the house.

LV - lift vector. Placement of the lift vector is everything in winning a BFM fight. 2-circle is a type of fight along with, as you guessed it, 1-circle. Viper guys like, for the most part, 2-circle while Hornets like, for the most part, 1-circle. Without getting into the whys, it essentially has to do with the strengths of each jet.

An example of the flow: 2 jets go to a merge with each other and both go pure nose high....that's 1-circle. Those same jets come to a merge and one jet goes pure nose high and the other goes pure nose low, that's 2-circle. Imagine not the 3D parts but what the jets look like in relation to each other.

I suck at describing stuff online, maybe someone can do it better.

The only thing I can offer (and it was pointed out in the "article") is that the F-35 that was used was AF-2, it's a "Flight Science" aircraft that's not even mission capable or configured.

 
LOL!

The best education you can get in respect to BFM is IPUG against a patch wearer. 3-4 hour debriefs the standard regardless of how well you did vs him. Weapons school grads (or Tog Gun) in the Navy are basically doctorates in employing your weapons system.
As for 1 v 2 circle. Imagine two jets next to each other but facing 180 deg aspect from each other. Now have one turn into the other, so northern fighter turns south into the southern jet, and the southern turns north, into the northern jet. Continue this for 360 degress and you see 2 seperate circles. In a one circle both jets turn either south or north basically scribing one circle. Usually jets with great AOA, nose authourity like one circle.

See I knew someone could describe it better than me!
Funny, take away the models and describing BFM is harder than it seems.

Here is the book I referenced. If you're not interested it's definitely a dry read. If you are, it's pretty solid.

http://www.scaredscriptless.com/images/jason/Star-Citizen/ACM/Fighter%20Combat%20-%20Tactics%20and%20Maneuvering.pdf

I'm not saying most of what his book has is still relevant (the YoYo discussion comes to mind), but geometry is still geometry.

Yep, communicating with the hands makes it much easier at the bar!

 

"So there i was......"

Hey Bull and FlyNavy...did either of you get to fly against a Fulcrum at any point in your careers and if so, what is your opinion of its strengths and weaknesses? Since we're talking about the best 4th generation dogfighters in the US arsenal (F-16, F-18), we might as well throw in the Soviet equivalent.

It is best jet of fighting of Glorious American airplane squadrons.

-V. Putin

No, unfortunately.

The Fulcrum has an abysmal combat record and the Flanker outclasses it in every respect. The Fulcrum in the right hands does have some game in the visual arena, but is way overmatched BVR by US fighters. The Russians do have some upgraded Fulcrums that will close the gap some, but in my mind the Fulcrum will always be an underachiever from what it should have been. Now, the Flankers.......those are a problem. I really respect that jet.

Yes, we deployed our Blk50 Vipers from Spangdahlem to  Deccimomanu Italy, Island of Sardinia.  We were sponsored my the German Fulcrums and flew daily against them.  Not going into details but they were highly overrated and very reliant on GCI etc.  Avionics and HOTAS very archaic compared to a block 50 viper.  Pretty good at cranking the nose around and cashing it it.  After that, they were done.  Archer was respectable the Alamo no so much.

 

Back then I take it they had the helmet and you guys didn't? Archer with a helmet can be a beast( from what I've read obviously). Luckily the AA-10A is such a piece of shit BVR missile that no Fulcrum pilot will make it to a merge, unless he is a lucky dude. 7000#s of gas isn't helpful to their cause either.

My personal research into such things reveals that Rules of Engagement are the greatest contributor to putting aircraft within sight of each other.

The second is the desire to avoid blue-on-blue engagements.

So how much?  Probably a 70/30 chance of getting into a dogfight.

Well, only those with a need to know should read it....and it requires the double-secret hand shake to open.

Thanks guys. That seems to be what most other western pilots who have flown against or have significant knowledge about the Fulcrum think of it.

BTW, I only brought up the Fulcrum from the standpoint of the Cold War. Had conflict broken out in central Europe during the late 1980s, it and the MiG-23 would have probably been the most numerous and more capable Soviet aircraft we would faced on that front. They didn't have that many Flankers back then and they were pretty much reserved for the air defense units inside the Soviet Union proper, not with frontal aviation units.

And yeah, the latest Flankers worry me a bit too. Not only do they have one of the best fighter airframes in the world with the Flanker, but with the Iron Curtain coming down and western nations (such as France) exporting advanced western electronics to Russia, it seems they have done a decent job of closing the technology gap a great bit. While I think something like the Raptor would still dominate any Flanker variant, I don't think our other current fighters like the F-18 Super Hornet stack up nearly as well against an Su-30 or an Su-35, which possesses what appears to be the most capable radar in a Russian fighter yet and that classic Flanker agility. As much as I hate to say it, the basic Flanker design is probably the ultimate evolution of the 4th generation airframe.

Me looking long time for electronic version.  Many thank yous.  (I have a hardcover copy)


What would be a more relevant source?