Pilot says F35 CAN'T dogfight!

a reply to: Xeven

Last I heard the Hornet's not going anywhere, anytime soon.

Boeing is very busily upgrading the SuperHornet (superduperHornet?) as we speak. Apparently, the Navy intends that the Hornet, in its various incarnations, will fly into the '30s.

If what I'm reading is, in truth, the truth, the Hornet will remain a more than viable aircraft for some time to come.

a reply to: seagull

The production line, if the supplementary spending bill passes, won't end until at least 2019. They've been looking at 2017, but the bill adds 12 Rhinos, and I think 6 Growlers that weren't in the original budget, but the Navy wanted.

ALRIGHT here is a FOLLOW up on that article I haven't GOT an opinion other than WE NEED the A-10 as groundpounders myself. WE'LL kill the friggin ADA if it's an issue
medium.com...

a reply to: cavtrooper7

So, as I said earlier. Older jet, 2B software, limited sensors, fixed helmet cueing system, etc.

And we're supposed to be surprised it lost why?

a reply to: Zaphod58

This is the same type of outrage that comes around when USAF jets go fight another country on their home turf, then lose because the home country imposed a bunch of crippling restrictions on the US jets.

To add to that, Strike Eagles will get killed by Vipers in almost every match up. Nobody complains about that. (I think you mentioned that earlier). The article mentions low energy dogfighting by the F-35 pilot. Guess what other airplane uses it's high alpha characteristics to it's advantage when going 1v1 against a Viper? Hornets. But that's a celebrated part of the Hornet's WVR flight envelope.

If you want a true 1v1 test of an F-35 and a Viper, set them up for a 100 mile merge in a fully equipped F-35. I guarantee you there won't be the same article written twice, no matter what configuration the Viper is in.

a reply to: justwanttofly

That was one thing that amazed me. The E model is heavier, but has more power (so much it was actually causing cracks from the vibration), is still an F-15, and gets eaten for lunch in pretty much every air to air scenario it has ever engaged in.

I think a lot of people might be missing the real point behind the F-35. Many hear "5th generation fighter" and think dogfighting. That's not why this jet was designed. It was designed as an F-16 replacement.

The primary F-16 missions are strike and SEAD, with them being used in a somewhat limited homeland defense role by the Guard/Reserves along with F-15Cs. In a deployed combat scenario, the Air Force wants a flight of Vipers to either deliver PGMs on a target or lay waste to enemy air defenses. Well, when faced with a modern threat environment, guess what's gonna happen to those Vipers nowadays? They're toast. Double digit SAMs and new Air to Air missiles will bring a hammer of wrath down upon them.

This is where the F-35 comes in. It can deliver PGMs deep into enemy airspace and wreak havoc upon their air defenses with unparalleled EW capabilities. Working together with Raptors, they deliver a one two air-ground punch that makes for a strike package planner's wet dream.

You want to set up a CAP and shoot down anything that your enemy tries to fly? This isn't your jet. There's a reason the Raptor went 256-0 or whatever in its first Red Flag. Because that's what it was designed and bred to do.

You want to launch 4 jets to deliver 16 GBU-38s in a contested environment, or to kick down the door of the enemy air defenses for your strike package? This is your jet. That's why it was made and that's its bread and butter.

a reply to: justwanttofly

The best description I've read was on Facebook. "The F-22 is the Pitbull dogfighter. The F-35 is a pack of Rottweilers with missiles."

And to add what I said earlier:

DellaVedova notes that the AF-2 test aircraft involved is used specifically for flight science testing and is not equipped with the mission systems, software, weapons, sensors or stealth coating of an operational F-35.

www.flightglobal.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Those things can be absolute pigs. All the added weight of the CFTs and other stuff they threw in there make them bleed energy at an awful rate.

It's a good thing they mostly operate under CAPs. If they tried to actually shoot anything down beyond BVR, they probably wouldn't stand a chance post-merge. Can you imagine a Strike Eagle with 9 GBU-12s, two external tanks, and fresh off the tanker trying to merge with a Mig-29 or Su-27? Dunzo.

a reply to: justwanttofly

Yeah, kinda hard to drop a bomb on one of those.

I'll just leave this here.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk...

a reply to: justwanttofly

THAT'S what THEY told us it would be..medium.com...

Now its a weapons carrier only THAT didn't work out for the F4 as I recall they said dogfighting was dead then as well.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

The F-35 can't be compared to the F-4. The Phantom was built from the ground up with air superiority in mind, the F-35 wasn't. Per that article, the goal was for the F-35 to be a strike aircraft that's able to defend itself if necessary. Not a long range air superiority interceptor ready to go toe to toe with any jet out there at a moments notice.

Want to go dogfight? Launch a Raptor instead.

why the article is garbage - makes an interesting read pointing out the limitations of the information in the OP link.

a reply to: justwanttofly

HOW can it be a strike atrcraft when the CAS mission is to fly low?
Do you actually THINK they would hazzard that aircraft to adequately support that mission?
What happends when stealth is comromised?

a reply to: cavtrooper7

theaviationist.com...

According to AW&ST the Lightning IIs achieved an important result during GF 15-08: not a single F-35 was “shot down” during the drills, a significant achievement for the JSF at its first active participation in a major exercise, especially considering that A-10s and F-16s were defeated in the same conditions.

More:

I spoke to another pilot who has closely watched the F-35s development and has extensive combat experience, Dave Deptula, who now heads the Air Force Associations’s Mitchell Institute. He’s also a member of the Breaking Defense Board of Contributors. Deptula flew the F-15 and twice led joint task forces, in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

His bottom line about what the test pilot said: It’s “interesting, but not relevant to the issue of campaign level utility of the other very significant advantages the F-35 possesses in the areas of low observability, sensor capability, and information integration that provide the F-35 an enormous advantage relative to legacy aircraft. If one can target and kill your adversaries prior to the merge, what they can do at the merge really doesn’t matter now, does it?”

He believes “the anti-F-35 crowd are so focused on how we fought in the last century with old equipment that they can’t conceive of, or understand the information edge advantage aircraft like the F-22 and F-35 provide.”

He even disdains the term “fighter” for the F-35 and F-22. “I’ve said for years and will continue to do so until the defense troglodytes finally get it (and some are slowly coming around)—5th generation aircraft are not ‘fighters’—they are ‘sensor-shooters’ optimized for different threat regimes, and can perform the roles of “F,” “B,” “A,” “RC,” “E,”EA,” and AWACS aircraft of the past.”

Deptula says that one F-35 “can create effects that require dozens of legacy aircraft, and in some cases dozens of legacy aircraft simply cannot accomplish with one or two ‘F’-22s or ‘F’-35s can accomplish.” Dogfighting isn’t the sine qua non of air combat, he argues. Killing the enemy before he knows you’re there is. “Bottom line—it’s about the information, stupid.”

breakingdefense.com...

Can the F-35 viff like the Harrier? It would be very interesting to see a viff vs cobra maneuver.

a reply to: buddah6

No. The Harrier just had moving exhaust. If the F-35 were to open that lift fan door at speed, it would rip right off.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Everyone was commenting on dogfighting and I thought that if it was able to viff that would have settled the argument.