wabpilot

The test bed that passed through Pax River a couple of years ago was quite maneuverable. But, it did not have any radar installed, so the electronics performance is pure guess work. As a retiree, they didn't let me get too close, so my observations are simply those of someone who has a little education and the rare privilege of a look at the XF-35 do some low altitude flying. I am not sure just how easy a time it would have killing an Eagle, but I expect the ratio to be favorable. The C should do better than the A or B simply because of wing differences.

A side note, A2A victories are usually described in ratios, for example 10:1, meaning in 11 engagements, one aircraft killed the enemy 10 times against one loss. It is almost unheard of for the ratio to be 10:0. Even the AD has a MiG kill. Few aircraft are totally dominant.

WECIV

A10 is better than the F22 at certain things.

W

FiRepower

F-35 is not meant for air sup.

hello

Well, the F-35 only carries 2 AMRAAMs in it's internal bays - the rest are bomb hardpoints, AFAIK. I don't know if it's weapon bays have been upgraded, but if they get upgraded, the F-35A/C can carry 4(or maybe 6) AMRAAMs internally. This means that it will probably kill as many Eagles/Hornets/Typhoons/Rafales/Su-35s as it has AMRAAMs. Once it's internally stored AMRAAMs are finished, and it's BVR stealth is no longer an advantage, it's best move would be to get out of there.

So I'd say that it would have a kill ratio of 4-0 per plane in a sortie unless something weird happens and an F-35 is lost. If this could happen to an F-22, it can happen to an F-35.

The F-35C would be the best of the lot, and can theoretically execute carrier strikes from longer distance than Super Hornets can and not expose the position of the carrier. It's also better than the Bug in A2A until it runs out of missiles.

IMO, the F-35A will replace the F-16 and F-117, but not the A-10, while F-35B will replace the AV-8 Harrier and the F-35C will partially replace the F-14.

F-22 doesn't compare to the F-35. They're supposed to complement each other in a Hi-Lo combo, not rival one another.

SRB

And how do you calculate that?

is AMRAAM 100% successful? I doubt that. Also I am very sure that OLS will give enough time for reaction on incoming missile, well for aircrafts that have OLS and right now it is still non operational Mig-35 which can go in production any moment but Mikoyan is need orders. money is problem everywhere. So VT and OLS will make 4 generation jets hard nut for BVR missiles.
There is good Australian article where they expect that their JSF will not be match for newest Su-30 with IRST in frontal engagement.

So as fighter JSF isnt good. I read in old (1998) "Flight" magazine very big article about F-35 , simple conclusion is that (even in that time when newest opponents was still in testing and tuning like Su-30 and Typhoon and Mig-35 was mark for couple of projects) F-35 will go on evading air combat. They never talk anything about AA F-35 scenario. That tells lot.

As bomber. Well it is very expensive to replace F-16 and Harrier. Also we could expect that enemy air defence and air force is destroy by F-22 and F-15 so how need stealth? For some black ops to me better option is F/A-22 with better A capabilities.

So F-22 is much better then F-35 and USAF move to get more F-22 instead of F-35 is right one. With little redesign F-22 can use in F-35 roles (expect V/STOL)

__________________

USSR EXPERIMENTAL SPITFIRE

Jimmy

Uh, no. On pretty much all points. When its fired within parameters, the AIM-120 has a very high pK. Especially if the radar supporting it isnt setting off the adversary's RWR.

The general population in the US sees the letter "F" in the beginning of an aircraft name, and they instantly think its a fighter first. The F-16 is a PERFECT example. The F-15E is another, although a lot of people have caught on that the -E is a different version. These planes are designed as multirole aircraft...capable of delivering a significant air-to-ground payload and being able to defend themselves or back up the dedicated fighters (F-15C).

The AF is trying to educate the masses that the F-35 is the same deal before everyone gets it in their head that its just another stealth fighter, like the F-22. If that idea gets implanted to firmly, Congress is gonna cut the order of F-35s and F-22s because they'll think they have the same mission. So they're emphasizing the F-35s a-g role, because that's the only way they can buy enough.

That Australian article has been debunked on this site already.

What's OLS?

GGTharos

OLS I believe is the IRST ... which I find very amusing, because IRST detection ranges against head-on fighters ain't all that ... and detection ranges against -stealthy- fighters with active IR signature supression measures is worse still.

Jimmy

Plus there's the whole "knowing where to point it" thing.

GGTharos

Well, they can do a scan, much like a radar ... the F-14's IRST did and does that, and the MiG-29A's did also ... but I believe there might be processing issues ... and while they've gotten much better now, well ... I can just imagine the number of false positives.

Dago

Well, if the F-35 is a good enough air superiority fighter for the Navy's ability to project and sustain operations in denied airspace, and protect the fleet, then i'd say it's a good enough "Air Superiority fighter" for the Air force as well.

As we all know, usually the Navy, not the Air Force, is usually the first to be called upon and placed in the hot spots of remote areas around the globe, and subsequently tasked with projecting as well as confronting denied airspace to assure no such challenges exist, and if need be, eliminated. Especially, in time critical, surgical strikes.

With that said, it may be the F-35's knocking down the door, even though, in irony, that it will be deployed some years after that of the F-22', with it's primary motto being, "knocking down the door". Before of that we see the F-22' knocking down the door.

We always relied upon the Tomcats and Hornets to respond to time critical events around the world. The F-35 will be no different.

Hey, I love the F-22 more than anything, but it's time to give a little love to those F-35's. If any bird were to go up against a Typhoon/Rafale/Flanker, or SA-300PMU/400' sam blanket, it's most likely, that the F-35 would first to fight.

Which suffice to say, can handle quite easily. :D

wabpilot

First, the F-35C is substantially different from the USAF's F-35A. Second, the F-35C is not and never was intended for fleet air defense. That is a shared obligation of the AEGIS CGs and DDGs and the F/A-18F.

Sometimes, but not usually or all the time. There is a reason for the Military Professional title.

Jimmy

Unless that little thing can do a fast 360 x 360 degree scan, you still have to narrow it down quite a bit. I'm sure most IRSTS have a wider azimuth range than their attached radars, but its still a crapshoot if you dont know where your enemy is, at least in a general direction.

Its an interesting theory, but way too broad. There have been plenty of examples where you're right, the Navy is the first on the scene. But a shining example of you being wrong is when Desert Shield was first starting up. The first US forces to receieve the "GO" order were 48 F-15Cs from the 1st Fighter Wing at Langley AFB and the 552 AWACS Wing.

Personally I think there's a snowball's chance in hell that the Air Force would accept the F-35 as its front-line fighter. I honestly believe they would divert funds to upgrading more F-15s and maintain them longer.

SRB

About OLS:
"Viktor Shargorodsky, NII PP general designer: “Stealth technology today is mostly decreasing it’s visibility in radio bands. But for the optical bands, especially in IR ranges the main parameter is temperature. And you can do nothing about it. Engines have great flow of hot air which can be detected perfectly from the big range if we are behind the plane. If we are going face to face, so first of all we still see some part of this flow and second we can see the front edges of wings which meet air flow and become warm too.”

Aviapedia » New MiG-35 OLS video

OLS is much different then old IRST systems use on (F-14, Su-27(30) and Mig-29) OLS is put only on Mig-35. OLS is 360 degree fast scan with gross cpu power.

My point is that AIM-120 is easily detected by this system. As I remember biggest advantage of AIM-120 is stealth it is passive missile. So now Russians build OLS which can spot AIM-120 in 360 degree range. Russians just said that OLS is capable to detect rocket head heat on distance of 5km so if AIM engine is burn out OLS is still capable to see missile. But if we count heat from AIM engine which isnt mixed with cooler air (B-2, F-22 system) then OLS know path of AIM from lunch to engine burn out.

Hm AIM-120 is good missile but overrated on last F-22 war games. Can anyone post what were AIM-120 rules in that games. From what I read it look like that any F-22 AIM-120 launch was kill it is big BS. 100% success please guys

GGTharos

And this is basically BS - while basically true, he neglects to mention that when all you can see is the edges, your range is cut down 5-8 fold from a rear aspect with afterburner. On a good day.

And that's /without/ the active IR supression system of the F-22 ... so you see, /yes/ you /can/ do something about the temperature and it /has/ been done. The F-22 was designed with the fact that Su-27's and MiG-29's have always had IRSTs

... The OLS might be 'different' to you, but its means of target detection is essentially the same.

The USAF has already been looking at systems like this - there's plenty of false positives last I heard about it, though these missile detectors are being mounted on large aircraft ... mostly to detect *launch flashes*. In other words, you're exaggerating the capabilities of the OLS.

What do you mean overrated? Maybe the F-22 + AIM-120 combination -is- that lethal. And if its ends up being 'only 90%', so what?

Dago

The JSF is the Navy's Frontline fighter for years to come. Being tasked with a great multitude of responsibilities. As a consequence triggering the cream of the crop of the opposing air force and capital ships. Which is fully capable of handling these threats quite throughly.

As you know we have VERY strict rules of engagements. Especially against air borne threats. With every instance I'm aware of, getting birds up in the air, as quickly as possible, is MANDATORY. With Fixed-Wing Aircraft being primarily tasked with engagement. Not capital ships. As with everything else, "anti-air" is met with air power it's self. As doctrine goes.

Though, as you know, logistical concerns PLAY tremendously. Due to geography, and the fact that the majority of international borders are border by the Ocean, and the ability of the Navy to be deployed around the World. It's only logical to assume that the Navy has the greatest ability to respond around the world to time-critical events. That is not to say that is always the case. However, with Range being less a issue. Basing rights and flyover rights less of a hassle. Well'...

That is not to say, however, that the Air Force doesn't have the capability nor doesn't play a vital role. That would be untrue. The Air Force is always involved. From intelligence gathering from Rivet's. AWACS. Or Strategic Tanking Assets. To ferrying fighters.

Unless, of course, we are talking about the remotes of Sibera, Central Asia, and Western China. Then it's anyones ball. Whether it be F-15's from Europe/Mideast/Japan. Or F/A-18's from Med/Persian/South Asia/East Asia. One thing is for sure, they will require one hell of amount of fuel.