Norwegian Instructor Lies about F-35 BFM Performance

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

10 years 10 months

Posts: 147

Send private message

By: OooShiny - 1st March 2016 at 10:17 - Edited 2nd October 2019 at 11:40

From a guy that's actually using the F-35 for dogfights. Apparently the F-35 is thumping the F-16 in proper BFM engagements at Luke.

a) Lying?
b) They sorted the rate issues covered by the test pilot report?
c) Prepared LM material?

Link to original translated article + additional pictures for those who need them:
http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2016/03/01/f-35-i-naerkamp-hva-har-jeg-laert-sa-langt-the-f-35-in-a-dogfight-what-have-i-learned-so-far/

[ATTACH=CONFIG]244423[/ATTACH]

I now have several sorties behind me in the F-35 where the mission has been to train within visual range combat one-on-one, or «Basic Fighter Maneuvers» (BFM). In a previous post I wrote about aerial combat in general (English version available), and about the likelihood that the F-35 would ever end up in such a situation. In this post, however, I write more specifically about my experiences with the F-35 when it does end up in a dogfight. Again, I use the F-16 as my reference. As an F-35-user I still have a lot to learn, but I am left with several impressions. For now my conclusion is that this is an airplane that allows me to be more forward and aggressive than I could ever be in an F-16.

I’ll start by talking a little about how we train BFM. This particular situation – a dogfight one-on-one between two airplanes – may be more or less likely to occur, as I have described in a previous blog post (Norwegian only). Nonetheless, this kind of training is always important, because it builds fundamental pilot skills. In this kind of training we usually start out from defined parameters, with clearly offensive, defensive or neutral roles. This kind of disciplined approach to the basic parameters is important, because it makes it easier to extract learning in retrospect – a methodical approach to train for air combat.

A typical training setup begins at a distance of one, two or three kilometers from the attacker to the defender. The minimum distance is 300 meters. That kind of restriction may seem conservative, but 300 meters disappears quickly in a combat aircraft. Starting at different distances allows us to vary the focus of each engagement. Greater distance means more energy, higher g-loads and often ends in a prolonged engagement. A short distance usually means that the main objective is to practice gun engagements, either attacking or defending.

Before the training begins, we always check whether we are “fit for fight”; will I be able to withstand the g-load today? «G-awareness exercise» implies two relatively tight turns, with gradually increasing g-load. My experience is that especially dehydration, but also lack of sleep affects g-tolerance negatively. If someone has a «bad g-day», we adjust the exercises accordingly and avoid high g-loads.

As the offensive part, the training objective is to exploit every opportunity to kill your opponent with all available weapons – both missiles and guns – while maneuvering towards a stable position behind the opponent. From this «control position» it is possible to effectively employ both missiles and the gun, without the opponent being able to evade or return fire.

So how does the the F-35 behave in a dogfight? The offensive role feels somewhat different from what I am used to with the F-16. In the F-16, I had to be more patient than in the F-35, before pointing my nose at my opponent to employ weapons; pointing my nose and employing, before being safely established in the control position, would often lead to a role reversal, where the offensive became the defensive part.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]244421[/ATTACH]

The F-35 provides me as a pilot greater authority to point the nose of the airplane where I desire. (The F-35 is capable of significantly higher Angle of Attack (AOA) than the F-16. Angle of Attack describes the angle between the longitudinal axis of the plane – where nose is pointing – and where the aircraft is actually heading – the vector). This improved ability to point at my opponent enables me to deliver weapons earlier than I am used to with the F-16, it forces my opponent to react even more defensively, and it gives me the ability to reduce the airspeed quicker than in the F-16.

Update: Since I first wrote this post, I have flown additional sorties where I tried an even more aggressive approach to the control position – more aggressive than I thought possible. It worked just fine. The F-35 sticks on like glue, and it is very difficult for the defender to escape.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]244422[/ATTACH]

It may be difficult to understand why a fighter should be able to «brake» quickly. In the offensive role, this becomes important whenever I point my nose at an opponent who turns towards me. This results in a rapidly decreasing distance between our two airplanes. Being able to slow down quicker provides me the opportunity to maintain my nose pointed towards my opponent longer, thus allowing more opportunities to employ weapons, before the distance decreases so much that a role reversal takes place.

To sum it up, my experience so far is that the F-35 makes it easier for me to maintain the offensive role, and it provides me more opportunities to effectively employ weapons at my opponent.

In the defensive role the same characteristics are valuable. I can «whip» the airplane around in a reactive maneuver while slowing down. The F-35 can actually slow down quicker than you´d be able to emergency brake your car. This is important because my opponent has to react to me «stopping, or risk ending up in a role-reversal where he flies past me. (Same principle as many would have seen in Top Gun; «hit the brakes, and he’ll fly right by.» But me quoting Top Gun does not make the movie a documentary)

Defensive situations often result in high AOA and low airspeeds. At high AOA the F-16 reacts slowly when I move the stick sideways to roll the airplane. The best comparison I can think of is being at the helm of ship (without me really knowing what I am talking about – I’m not a sailor). Yet another quality of the F-35 becomes evident in this flight regime; using the rudder pedals I can command the nose of the airplane from side to side. The F-35 reacts quicker to my pedal inputs than the F-16 would at its maximum AOA (the F-16 would actually be out of control at this AOA). This gives me an alternate way of pointing the airplane where I need it to, in order to threaten an opponent. This «pedal turn» yields an impressive turn rate, even at low airspeeds. (implying the F-35 has a very impressive yaw rate at higher speeds?) In a defensive situation, the «pedal turn» provides me the ability to rapidly neutralize a situation, or perhaps even reverse the roles entirely.

The overall experience of flying the F-35 in aerial combat is different from what I’m used to with the F-16. One obvious difference is that the F-35 shakes quite a bit at high g-loadings and at high angles of attack, while the F-16 hardly shakes at all. The professional terminology is «buffeting», which I also described in an earlier blog post (English version available). This buffeting serves as useful feedback, but it can also be a disadvantage. Because the buffeting only begins at moderate angles of attack, it provides me an intuitive feel for how much I am demanding from the aircraft; what is happening to my overall energy state? On the other hand, several pilots have had trouble reading the information which is displayed on the helmet visor, due to the buffeting. Most of the pilots here at Luke fly with the second-generation helmet. I fly with the third-generation helmet, and I have not found this to be a real issue.

What I initially found to a bit negative in visual combat was the cockpit view, which wasn´t as good as in the F-16. The cockpit view from the F-16 was good – better than in any other fighter I have flown. I could turn around and look at the opposite wingtip; turn to the right, look over the «back» of the airplane and see the left wingtip. That´s not quite possible in the F-35, because the headrest blocks some of the view. Therefore, I was a bit frustrated during my first few BFM-sorties. However, It turned out that practice was all it took to improve the situation. Now I compensate by moving forward in the seat and leaning slightly sideways, before turning my head and looking backwards. In this way I can look around the sides of the seat. I also use my hands to brace against the cockpit glass and the canopy frame. With regards to cockpit view alone, I had an advantage in the F-16, but I am still able to maintain visual contact with my opponent during aggressive maneuvering in the F-35. The cockpit view is not a limitation with regards to being effective in visual combat, and it would be a misunderstanding to present this as a genuine problem with the F-35.

On the positive side I would like to highlight how the F-35 feels in the air. I am impressed with the stability and predictability of the airplane. Particularly at high AOA and low airspeeds. It is a peculiar feeling to be flying the F-35 at high AOA. I can pull the nose up to where my feet «sit» on the horizon and still maintain level altitude. I’m also impressed by how quickly the F-35 accelerates when I reduce the AOA. High AOA produces lots of lift, but also tremendous induced drag. When I «break» the AOA, it is evident that the F-35 has a powerful engine. The F-35 also makes a particular sound at this point. When I quickly reduce the AOA – stick full forward – I can hear clearly, even inside the «cockpit» how the F-35 howls! It seems like the «howling» is a mix of airflow over the wings and a different kind of noise from the engine. Maybe this isn’t all that relevant, but I still think it´s a funny observation. Another aspect is the kind of reaction I get when I push the stick forward; the F-35 reacts immediately, and not delayed like the F-16. Looking at another F-35 doing such maneuvers is an impressive sight. The various control surfaces on the airplane are large, and they move very quickly. I can monitor these movements on the screens in my cockpit, and I´m fascinated by how the control surfaces move when I manipulate the stick and pedals. Especially at high AOA, it is not always intuitive what control surfaces move, and by how much.

The final «textbook» for how to best employ the F-35 in visual combat – BFM – is not written. It is literally being written by my neighbor, down here in Arizona! We have had many good discussions on this topic over the last few weeks, and it feels very rewarding to be part the development. I would emphasize the term “multirole” after experiencing this jet in many roles, and now also in a dogfight. The F-35 has a real bite! Those in doubt will be surprised when they finally meet this «bomber”.

Attachments
Original post

Member for

15 years 10 months

Posts: 3,280

Send private message

By: Loke - 1st March 2016 at 10:35 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

I don't really understand the aerodynamics, but my impression from reading what the Norwegian test pilot has written, is that the F-35 is going to be quite a dog fighter.

Member for

11 years 8 months

Posts: 3,156

By: hopsalot - 1st March 2016 at 12:31 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

I don't really understand the aerodynamics, but my impression from reading what the Norwegian test pilot has written, is that the F-35 is going to be quite a dog fighter.

Of course not, we have heard from literally dozens of sources that it is fat, slow, and unmaneuverable. (Who cares if none of the sources have had a chance to see an actual F-35 at an air show yet.... :cool: )

On a slightly more serious note, this pilot illustrates exactly what some of the better informed posters here have been saying all along. An F-35 is a very different jet in its basic philosophy than an F-16. A pilot that tried to fly an F-35 like an F-16 would do poorly, but a pilot that flew an F-35 to its strengths would find he had some pretty significant strengths available to him.

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

By: MSphere - 1st March 2016 at 12:51 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

It's simple.. With the F-35 allegedly having such remarkable nose pointing authority, we shall soon see some breathtaking high AoA maneuvers performed by this aircraft.
I personally am not holding my breath.. But do wake me up when a video like that pops out..

Member for

11 years 8 months

Posts: 3,156

By: hopsalot - 1st March 2016 at 13:08 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

It's simple.. With the F-35 allegedly having such remarkable nose pointing authority, we shall soon see some breathtaking high AoA maneuvers performed by this aircraft.
I personally am not holding my breath.. But do wake me up when a video like that pops out..

Ah, yes... the airshow test.

Member for

24 years 3 months

Posts: 11,742

Send private message

By: Sens - 1st March 2016 at 13:09 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

It's simple.. With the F-35 allegedly having such remarkable nose pointing authority, we shall soon see some breathtaking high AoA maneuvers performed by this aircraft.
I personally am not holding my breath.. But do wake me up when a video like that pops out..

A F-18 driver with a high AoA capability tells you he has no problem to deal with every fighter threat. The F-35 is even better.

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

By: MSphere - 1st March 2016 at 13:22 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Sure.. just like the F-18, the F-35 has tremendous high AoA capability.. it just can't show it..

Member for

12 years 10 months

Posts: 2,661

Send private message

By: Vnomad - 1st March 2016 at 14:36 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Sure.. just like the F-18, the F-35 has tremendous high AoA capability.. it just can't show it..

You know the operational AoA limit for the F-35A is 50 degrees right? Twice that of the F-16. Higher than the F-18 and comparable to the Super Hornet.

Member for

15 years 4 months

Posts: 6,441

Send private message

By: haavarla - 1st March 2016 at 14:42 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Sure.. just like the F-18, the F-35 has tremendous high AoA capability.. it just can't show it..

Well the F-35 being produced in the three digits by now and by Year End will go IOC.
It even performed an breathtaking transocean leg.
Surely at the nearest airshow it can show us some impressive stuff?

Member for

15 years 10 months

Posts: 3,280

Send private message

By: Loke - 1st March 2016 at 15:00 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

You know the operational AoA limit for the F-35A is 50 degrees right? Twice that of the F-16. Higher than the F-18 and comparable to the Super Hornet.

Interesting paper on AOA and Gripen; Saab divided external stores into different classes:

Stores from class I and II have the full
AOA envelope. Stores from class III and IV
have a restricted AOA envelope, reduced roll
performance as well as maximum load factor.

http://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS2000/PAPERS/ICA3113.PDF

It seems other fighters do something similar, e.g. Rafale:

The DFCS is a "g" demand system with +9.0g/29° angle of attack (AoA) limit in air-to-air mode and +5.5g/20° AoA limit in both of the two air-to-ground/heavy stores modes (ST1 and ST2) to cater for forward or aft centre of gravity.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/flight-test-dassault-rafale-rampant-rafale-334383/

The most amazing a/c in production today are IMHO the F-35 and Rafale. (probably also the most survivable)

Member for

8 years 11 months

Posts: 572

By: Jessmo23 - 1st March 2016 at 15:15 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

It's simple.. With the F-35 allegedly having such remarkable nose pointing authority, we shall soon see
some breathtaking high AoA maneuvers performed by this aircraft.
I personally am not holding my breath.. But do wake me up when a video like that pops out..

A Video like this?
https://youtu.be/mfWHHuLILs0

Member for

14 years 3 months

Posts: 3,259

Send private message

By: TooCool_12f - 1st March 2016 at 15:27 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

he said "manoeuvers", not "aircraft dropping flat"

in that video, whenever you have a valid visual reference (horizon), the trajectory, visible by the condensation trail, is a straight descending line... it is not falling out of control, but it is not manoeuvering either

Member for

12 years 3 months

Posts: 3,106

Send private message

By: FBW - 1st March 2016 at 15:54 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Well the F-35 being produced in the three digits by now and by Year End will go IOC.
It even performed an breathtaking transocean leg.
Surely at the nearest airshow it can show us some impressive stuff?

Doubt it, most likely the majority of the F-35's airshow performance will (probably) consist of those slow speed tail slides, failing leaf stalls, hammerhead turns common in F-18 Super Demos. They wow crowds, but are just boring.

What happened to the days of the high speed passes and aggressive maneuvers like old F-16 displays (though I've seen a Typhoon demo that fits the bill).

The red bull planes can put any combat aircraft to shame, as they don't actually need to carry equipment, loads, or perform a mission. And that is about the utility of airshows.

Member for

9 years 10 months

Posts: 1,765

Send private message

By: Marcellogo - 1st March 2016 at 15:57 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Just to remember that High AoA means just that plane still retain a positive lift factor when going into a steep dive. It doesn't automatically translate in a post stall maneouvrability of any sort.
So TooCool_12f have its part of reason,Jessmo it's own.

For the rest how would fare an old F-100 against even a baseline F-16A?
Because, you know, they have passed lessen years between the two than between F-16 operativity and F-35 FIRST FLIGHT.

Member for

8 years 11 months

Posts: 572

By: Jessmo23 - 1st March 2016 at 17:07 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

he said "manoeuvers", not "aircraft dropping flat"

in that video, whenever you have a valid visual reference (horizon), the trajectory, visible by the condensation trail, is a straight descending line... it is not falling out of control, but it is not manoeuvering either

You people are funny. You ask for evidence.
When evidence is presented you move the goal posts. Here is a J-turn at about 2:15.
Can the F-16 do this?
https://youtu.be/O6XofdlfJ0k

Member for

18 years 11 months

Posts: 4,472

By: Nicolas10 - 1st March 2016 at 18:07 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

It may be difficult to understand why a fighter should be able to «brake» quickly.

lol

And me who thought AoA was limited on fighters because it prevents them to shed speed too quickly while manoeuvering.

haha he gets even better:

This buffeting serves as useful feedback

:eagerness:

So if I understand the guy right, the two main strengths of the F35 in BFM are:

- It sheds energy like a motherfnebber
- Buffeting

Nic

Member for

16 years 7 months

Posts: 1,348

Send private message

By: Mercurius - 1st March 2016 at 18:21 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Surely at the nearest airshow it can show us some impressive stuff?

Too many pilots have died while trying to do "impressive stuff" at air shows, including a personal friend. So forgive me if I do not share your sense of anticipation.

Member for

14 years 3 months

Posts: 3,259

Send private message

By: TooCool_12f - 1st March 2016 at 19:07 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

You people are funny. You ask for evidence.
When evidence is presented you move the goal posts. Here is a J-turn at about 2:15.
Can the F-16 do this?
https://youtu.be/O6XofdlfJ0k

er, did you listen to what the guys in your video were saying, or did you just put some AC/DC ou similar sound to watch the show? the video is about putting the aircraft at high AoA and into a spin and test/develop its recovery from that.

Besides, one can recognise that its recovery is quite good, it does it on its own (pilot stops the inputs that led to the spin and lets the aircraft do its stuff), but as it is a safety measure, it is not about manoeuvering at high AoA

Member for

12 years 4 months

Posts: 5,905

Send private message

By: TomcatViP - 1st March 2016 at 19:10 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

You know the operational AoA limit for the F-35A is 50 degrees right? Twice that of the F-16. Higher than the F-18 and comparable to the Super Hornet.

What are your values for the SH? I have read the Flight Manual but only the old edition that was available at the time on the Web.

Also, Max AoA in the US might include the notion of being able to roll around your velocity vector. In other country or older designs, your stick is simply stuck concrete by the limiters*.

@OooShiny: Thanks for sharing! Allways invaluable to have a first hand experience narration. Sadly, there is there nearly nothing that any rationale people would learn. I did laugh quite a bit reading the Multirole paragrah. Omnirole, Multirole, the marketing guys are all war footing?

I would emphasize the term “multirole” after experiencing this jet in many roles, and now also in a dogfight.

Member for

14 years 3 months

Posts: 3,259

Send private message

By: TooCool_12f - 1st March 2016 at 19:12 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

Too many pilots have died while trying to do "impressive stuff" at air shows, including a personal friend. So forgive me if I do not share your sense of anticipation.

I'm really sorry to read about your friend, but I don't think haavarla expected a pilot to go on and improvise something pretty much beyond of what he or the aircraft is supposed to be able to handle. Airshows are there to demonstrate the known capabilities and are, normally, well prepared... accidents are very unfortunate, but will always happen here and there, the aviation business being, by nature, a dangerous thing (even with small light aircraaft flying gently on sundays for a nice ride with a few friends...) . if we don't want any, the airshows can just as well all be cancelled, the aircraft being only presented in static displays

Member for

12 years 10 months

Posts: 2,661

Send private message

By: Vnomad - 1st March 2016 at 19:19 - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00

lol

And me who thought AoA was limited on fighters because it prevents them to shed speed too quickly while manoeuvering.


Lol indeed.

As it happens you're wrong. The AoA is limited to prevent departure from controlled flight. In the F-35's case it can push to 50 deg AoA before that happens.

Shedding speed is a necessary element of a high ITR min radius turn. No different in principle from a bike/car braking at corners.