Hot Dog's Ketchup Filled F-35 News Thread

[SpudmanWP]

Claims backed up by actual test data, as in turn rate, max speed, etc. For example, the max speed of the F-35 is given at M1.6 (with weapons). If you look at the performance charts of the F-18E, it can only do ~m1.4 when loaded with 4 missiles.

[Geoff_B]

Claims backed up by actual test data, as in turn rate, max speed, etc. For example, the max speed of the F-35 is given at M1.6 (with weapons). If you look at the performance charts of the F-18E, it can only do ~m1.4 when loaded with 4 missiles.

Wow has the testing streaked ahead of itself that the F-35 has now been tested under full load ?

[MSphere]

Claims backed up by actual test data, as in turn rate, max speed, etc. For example, the max speed of the F-35 is given at M1.6 (with weapons). If you look at the performance charts of the F-18E, it can only do ~m1.4 when loaded with 4 missiles.

Which flight was it? What prototype?

[jdsgn]

Which flight was it? What prototype?

You are right, they have no idea what they are doing Might as well throw in the towel... poor dumb LM.

[Sintra]

Claims backed up by actual test data, as in turn rate, max speed, etc. For example, the max speed of the F-35 is given at M1.6 (with weapons). If you look at the performance charts of the F-18E, it can only do ~m1.4 when loaded with 4 missiles.

Spudman

I hope you are not claiming that somehow a generalistic journal had access to the actual test data of the JDASF and on top of that, the line of "Operability/Maneuverability" in that chart is related to flight performance, because if you are...

[SpudmanWP]

@Geoff: The F-35 has been flown in testing with dummy internal weapons (there are plenty of pics of this). Even after this series of tests the KPP of M1.6 with 2 AMRAAMS and 2 2k JDAMS has held.

@Sintra: The Nikkei weekly is not just a journal, heard of the Nikkei Index much? As to "Operability/Maneuverability", that pretty much means flight performance (remember we are talking armed, no clean airshow performance).

[Loke]

Claims backed up by actual test data, as in turn rate, max speed, etc. For example, the max speed of the F-35 is given at M1.6 (with weapons). If you look at the performance charts of the F-18E, it can only do ~m1.4 when loaded with 4 missiles.

Perhaps there are reasons why India dropped the SH and kept only Typhoon and Rafale in the race?

Not that it matters much; Japan will choose an American bird; SH if F-35 is too much delayed, and F-35 otherwise.

A pity Europe cannot join forces and develop at true 5. gen a/c. Oh well c'est la vie.

[TooCool_12f]

If my memory serves well, that is why dassault didn't even bother making a proposal for Japan

[Sens]

@Geoff: The F-35 has been flown in testing with dummy internal weapons (there are plenty of pics of this). Even after this series of tests the KPP of M1.6 with 2 AMRAAMS and 2 2k JDAMS has held.

@Sintra: The Nikkei weekly is not just a journal, heard of the Nikkei Index much? As to "Operability/Maneuverability", that pretty much means flight performance (remember we are talking armed, no clean airshow performance).

How about the source/link?! The F-18E has some speed limitatations depending on the kind of pylons fitted. To be of intrest only going above 30 kft or max service-ceiling in mind.

[SpudmanWP]

I was a little off, it's slightly under m1.6 at a very small altitude margin.

[obligatory]

As far as i can tell, F-35 has nuffing in the design that indicate good performance.

Here's some wiki numbers, they only have to be roughly accurate to paint the picture.

EF Typhoon
# Wing loading: 312 kg/m2[221] (64.0 lb/ft2)
# Thrust/weight: 1.15

F-35
# Wing loading: 91.4 lb/ft² (446 kg/m²)
# Thrust/weight: **With full fuel: 0.87

What's more, it's a given that EF has an inbuilt negative stability, while F-35 should be ~neutral, at best. Is there any info on this ?
On top of that, the only thing that compromised extreme agility on EF design was flight safety, while F-35 design was compromised by both VTOL & "Stealth"

A better comparison would be EF vs F-22, i think the F-22 will have the edge at low speed/alt, while EF wins at high alt/speed

[obligatory]

I once had a F-22 performance chart like this: Can someone upload it ?

[SpudmanWP]

F-35
# Wing loading: 91.4 lb/ft² (446 kg/m²)

That does not take into account the lift generated by the lifting body design of the fuselage.

[Sens]

That does not take into account the lift generated by the lifting body design of the fuselage.

Correct claim, but every fighter has some "body-lift". Without that the value of the wing-load is left for a general comparison. Otherwise every twin-engine fighter has a better value in general.

[SpudmanWP]

The proportion of F-35s body lift vs. total lift is more than that of most other fighters, even twin engine ones like the Eurofighter, Rafale, F-18, etc and is much greater than skinny single engine fighters like the F-16, Gripen, etc.

Obviously large spaced twin engined fighters like the SU series and the F-15 have a great amount of body lift that was proven quite convincingly when the Israeli F-15 landed with most of it's right wing missing (remember that this was without the benefit of fbw).

[toan]

Biggest surprise for F-35 haters is that it placed the F-35 above the F-18 and Typhoon in "Operability/Maneuverability"

1. Not so surprising if the graphic includes the "Stealthy capability" in the definition of operability.


2. As for maneuverability, you can also easily make F-35A as the No.1 under the certain definition:

* F-35A can fly to Mach 1.6 with two 2,000 pounds bombs and two AIM-120, while both EF-2000 and F/A-18E can only fly at subsonic speed with the same payload.

* F-35A can reach the AoA of up to 50 degrees even with the payload mentioned above, while F/A-18E can do the same thing only under the clean configuration, and the productional EF-2000's maximal AoA limited by the FCS is no more than 30 degrees in any kind of configuration.

[MSphere]

You are right, they have no idea what they are doing Might as well throw in the towel... poor dumb LM.

They do.. They just don't tell..

[Twinblade]

Here is a graphic from the above Nikkei article (thanks Slowman for providing).

The first category is "Operability/Maneuverability", the second category is "Industrial Participation", the third category is "Relations with the US".

Biggest surprise for F-35 haters is that it placed the F-35 above the F-18 and Typhoon in "Operability/Maneuverability"

Obviously when you couple operation capability and maneuverability together, it will give you a distorted picture. No one, even the most avid f-35 haters, doubts the operation capability of f-35 over the other two.

PS: I would absolutely LOVE to see a similar chart for South Korean competition . That. would make a really nice chart for a f-35 hater

[i.e.]

Obviously when you couple operation capability and maneuverability together, it will give you a distorted picture. No one, even the most avid f-35 haters, doubts the operation capability of f-35 over the other two.

PS: I would absolutely LOVE to see a similar chart for South Korean competition . That. would make a really nice chart for a f-35 hater

It's Mistranslated.

First column's category should be something like "Handling Quality/ Performance" or "Handling Quality/ Agility"

I seriously doubt F-35 in this category...may be the score is heavily weighed towards one type of mission.

[i.e.]

Shock Japan buys American. Scared of china and it's power in the region buy from the only country able to check any Chinese aggression.

way out of topic. but since the moderator obviously allows for above highly political commentary then may I indulge.

Really, what's japan scared of?
big bad china still has a smaller navy than JMSDF. and its ADIZ is right up china's nose...

[Twinblade]

It's Mistranslated.

First column's category should be something like "Handling Quality/ Performance" or "Handling Quality/ Agility"

I seriously doubt F-35 in this category...may be the score is heavily weighed towards one type of mission.

Thanks, so where is the operations capability comparison ? And relations with US as a parameter ? surely this can't be an official comparison ?

[i.e.]

Thanks, so where is the operations capability comparison ? And relations with US as a parameter ? surely this can't be an official comparison ?

what is "operations capability"? you have to define a set of tasks (mission profile and availability etc) and measure each airplane's performance accordingly. with out knowing their metric to guess those ratings is almost useless.

and Yes, I am not surprised that relation with US is used as metric semi-officially. Nikkie has alot of links with the conservative bureaucratic elite that runs that country.
unfortunately Japan has lost its own ways, and since 1945 with the brief exception in 80s, the general masses and all the way upto the political elite can not take a leak with out US.
they think Americans as their father. sign...I wish Japan could think for itself little bit more. and have little more self confidence and self-respect and figure out its own future in East Asia. US is really treating Japan like their own slave vassal.

[SpudmanWP]

Given that the F-35 is a 9g airframe, (which the F-18 is not even close to with a 7.6g limit) and the F-35 is faster than the F-18 with weapons, I think it's pretty accurate.

[i.e.]

Japan buying F-18E/F is really stupid. its no better a platform than F-15.
and you can certainly stuff a F-15 full of AESA and jammers to your own content and still have all the cardinal performance.

JSF even more so. may be they may want to have a path to 35B so can finally have their carriers,...or should I say 40000 ton large aircraft carrying escorts.
but for their primary mission which is air-defense/ air interception, F35A is really a bad choice. they opt for a skinny wing so they can hit a MMo forchrisake, even a 35C is more preferable.

Typhoon may not be a bad choice. if quantity can be delivered in time to fill the gaps. while same time focus their industrial energy into a domestic midsized fighter program.

[i.e.]

Given that the F-35 is a 9g airframe, (which the F-18 is not even close to with a 7.6g limit) and the F-35 is faster than the F-18 with weapons, I think it's pretty accurate.

If I would to choose I would take a lightened 35C in this case.
bigger wing bigger range bigger payload for little loss in top speed.

then again I would prefer japan to design and build its own. may be finally it can throw off the crutches.

[SpudmanWP]

How is the F-35 a bad choice for Air-defense/Air-interception? It goes above m1.6 with 4 internal AMRAAMs (the F-18 cannot do that), it has an IRST, has stealthy data links, EODAS, and its radar and RwR are linked to act as a single unit, and has a radar that even the APA says is second to only the F-22's APG-77.

What about the F-35C makes it a better choice than the F-35 for this mission? It only has a range benefit of less than 100nm but gives up 1.5g of maneuverability, costs about $20 million more than the F-35A, has no internal gun, and does not carry any more AAMs than the F-35A.

---edit--

The only way to realistically lighten the C is to change the landing gear which will not give you much of a benefit. If you try and lighten the structure you will lose more g loading ability and have to retest the airframe (basically making a F-35D).

[i.e.]

How is the F-35 a bad choice for Air-defense/Air-interception? It goes above m1.6 with 4 internal AMRAAMs (the F-18 cannot do that), it has an IRST, has stealthy data links, EODAS, and its radar and RwR are linked to act as a single unit, and has a radar that even the APA says is second to only the F-22's APG-77.

What about the F-35C makes it a better choice than the F-35 for this mission? It only has a range benefit of less than 100nm but gives up 1.5g of maneuverability, costs about $20 million more than the F-35A, has no internal gun, and does not carry any more AAMs than the F-35A.

---edit--

The only way to realistically lighten the C is to change the landing gear which will not give you much of a benefit.

I am really curious to see that V-n diagram of F-35Cs vs 35As.
of course this would be may be 10 years before any of that is public.

[Twinblade]

Given that the F-35 is a 9g airframe, (which the F-18 is not even close to with a 7.6g limit) and the F-35 is faster than the F-18 with weapons, I think it's pretty accurate.

Well Spudman, i am disappointed at the ratings given for Typhoon. I sort of hoped for MMRCA like trials. I know SH is no slouch but typhoon getting knocked out and SH still in race doesn't really sound the best "technical" short list to me.

[SpudmanWP]

I think they looked at what the Typhoon offered and decided it did not outweigh the loss of American relations over the sale. I think if the roles were reversed (eg if the Eurofighter was of F-35's caliber and all the US put forth was the F-15/18), then Japan could have easily gone the other way.

I too would have loved to see the F-35 in a knock down, drag out competition.

[quadbike]

Well Spudman, i am disappointed at the ratings given for Typhoon. I sort of hoped for MMRCA like trials. I know SH is no slouch but typhoon getting knocked out and SH still in race doesn't really sound the best "technical" short list to me.

The typhoon may not be as maneuverable as the other two in wvr. Which is not all that surprising to me.

F 35 :diablo: