Why USAF, USN, USMC and others want this F-35?

[artik]

I just did a small comparison of the common modern (and not so) aircrafts based on their performance^*.

(ordered by T/W ratio)

Aircraft	Loaded T/W	Climb (f/s)	Wing Load (p/f^2)	Speed (M)
Eurofighter Typhoon	1.14	62,000	64.0	2.0
Su-35	1.13	55,100	84.0	2.22
F-15C	1.12	50,000	73.0	2.5
Dassault Rafale	1.10	60,000	62.0	1.8
F-22	1.08	40,000	77.0	2.25
F-16C Block 30	1.07	50,000	88.0	2.0
F-18E	0.93	45,000	94.0	1.8
F-35	0.88	~40,000**	107.0	1.6
F-4E	0.86	41,300	78	1.8
MiG-23	0.83	47,300	78	2.32
MiG-21	0.81	44,300	77	2.0

^*All data taken from Wikipedia
^**Estimated by interpolation


The acceleration of - F-35 is very poor - somewhere around 70ths, the maneuverability is poor - it has very high wing loading, its speed relatively low, its estimated climb ratio is quite low as well.

Basically: it can't run, it can't turn, it can't climb making it trivial target in WVR engagement.

Indeed in BWR engagement it would have an important edge - it is stealthy so it would be hard to shut it down from big distance, but once
it tries to engage you it discloses its location (RWR) and you can catch it and shut down in WVR engagement easily.

And additional problem is the ROE. In dessert storm, it was hard to operate using BVR weapons because you need to confirm that the target
is not friendly. Even with these restrictions there were many friendly fire accidents.

So basically: F-35 would probably be not bad strike aircraft - due to its stealth, but it is limited as well as long wave radars are still capable to track
them (see F-117 how F-117 was shutdown) and thus it still can be intercepted. F-35B would likely to be good replacement of Harrier (as nothing better exists) but it would be absolutely inferior against modern 4th+ generation fighters unless the engagement is strictly BVR.


So why USAF, USN, USMC and others want this F-35? Wouldn't it be the same mistake that was made in Vietnam were the "strategists" believed that missiles would not require knowing ACM, so today strategists believe that "it would be resolved BVR"

[bozon]

The F-35 is turning to be a white elephant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_elephant)

Initially, foreign (non US) countries were invited to invest in the project and in return be able to influence its development and get a custom version to fit their needs. Many countries that do not and/or cannot build their own fighters jumped on the opportunity - including Israel by the way. IAF pushed for this because they really liked the idea of a stealth attack plane and getting access to brand new models  - the US usually delays such sales and eventually agrees to sell them to Israel as part of a bigger deal with a political cost attached, or as a way to block Israel from a different deal. The Israeli defense industries were thrilled at the opportunity to get their stuff installed in the plane on the production line instead of the usual deal of getting naked planes, or planes with American equipment that needs to be removed/modified.

As development continued, the price kept climbing and progress delayed. The design that tried to satisfy too many requirements has evolved into something that is not really good for anyone's requirements and offer little advantage over upgrades to previous gen planes, except for the stealth. Now I hear that they refuse to install Israeli equipment at the production stage and demand that Israel buys it with the American equipment.

There are many in Israel and other countries that call to withdraw from this project, but there is too much money invested and complicated politics attached, so the decision is not easy - especially when the alternative is not really clear or immediately available.

[Gixer]

It's unfortunate they sucked Aussie into the programme. Certainly possible it will go down as the biggest white elephant in aviation history. By the time it's delivered in numbers and combat ready  piloted planes could be in their last years of service with the rate of Drone development.

Personally I don't think the F22 is worth the cost either, will never be delivered in enough numbers to make a difference on any future battlefield.

But out of both programmes, there must be a few people making an absolute killing out of it in invoices.


<S>...-Gixer

[Rich46yo]

When was the F-117 shut down. Was that on Wikipedia too? You do realize anybody could log onto Wikipedia and post what they want in its little pages dont you?

OK heres the deal. There is no enemy Air Force after a strike package of F-35s are able to enter their air space undetected and their air defense assets are blown away in opening night strikes. After, whatever is left, will be vulnerable to F35 wild weasel attack planes. The air war will then have shifted to USAF whom with our AWACs will have a complete picture of the air space with our fighters "NETWORKED" in to it.

I dont know what Political cost to Israel your talking about. Nor is such talk allowed in the forum. I do know the American taxpayer, who has been funding Israel's defense for decades, does not appreciate it.

Theres no point building a airplane, large enough to look like an elephant on a radar screen, so you can do fancy maneuvers in an air show, when you can build a stealthy one who's pilot is equipped with a electronic marvel of a helmet that allows him a virtually 360% ATA missile shot be it BVR or in close. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f20_1342071775 A modern fighter is a combination of performance, avionics, information systems, pilot skill, and mechanical reliability.

It seems like every time Paris comes around, or some INTL air show, where these SU's are performing useless maneuvers for the crowd, more disinformation about the f35 follows on the Internet. One can assume Russia and China have some reason for spending Billions of Rubles and yuan to get a stealth fighter flying.

[Puma44]

Personally I don't think the F22 is worth the cost either, will never be delivered in enough numbers to make a difference on any future battlefield.

It's a concept called "force multiplier".  

[GScholz]

I just did a small comparison of the common modern (and not so) aircrafts based on their performance^*.

(ordered by T/W ratio)

Aircraft	Loaded T/W	Climb (f/s)	Wing Load (p/f^2)	Speed (M)
Eurofighter Typhoon	1.14	62,000	64.0	2.0
Su-35	1.13	55,100	84.0	2.22
F-15C	1.12	50,000	73.0	2.5
Dassault Rafale	1.10	60,000	62.0	1.8
F-22	1.08	40,000	77.0	2.25
F-16C Block 30	1.07	50,000	88.0	2.0
F-18E	0.93	45,000	94.0	1.8
F-35	0.88	~40,000**	107.0	1.6
F-4E	0.86	41,300	78	1.8
MiG-23	0.83	47,300	78	2.32
MiG-21	0.81	44,300	77	2.0

Hang weapons and fuel on all those aircraft and the F-35 will be second only to the F-22 in performance. "Air show mode" performance is irrelevant.

[eagl]

Add in a modern F-15E, both clean and with CFTs.  58,000 lbs thrust, empty weight around 37,000 lbs, internal fuel only about 12,000 lbs and "clean" (no external fuel) air to air weapons weight of another 1500 lbs.  So it'll take off in butt-kicking config with 58,000 lbs thrust weighing only 51,000 lbs, and it can still be on station an hour later weighing only 45,000 lbs after burning off just half its fuel.

An AF unit was going to use a combat ready F-15E with the -229 motors to utterly demolish all the streak eagle records.  They were strictly forbidden to make even unofficial attempts, because on paper a clean and only slightly lightened F-15E might have better basic performance numbers than an F-22.  It doesn't tell the whole story so it wouldn't mean anything, but it would be hard to explain to people who know nothing about fighters why the F-22 was better. 

That's the problem with that table.  An F-15E demolishes most of those raw numbers but that doesn't tell anywhere near the whole story.

[bozon]

Rich46yo, did you look at the wikipedia link? it was for the definition of the expression "white elephant", not to any information about planes.

I will not go into politics, but the American tax payer you mentioned is not funding Israel as much as it is subsidizing its own military industries. The foreign military aid is a byproduct, but of course no government will dare to present it this way. The foreign aid is a strong tool used to support various american interests abroad, but most of all to shield its own industries from foreign competition. I will not go into details because they are complicated and likely to start a flame that will get this thread locked.

The marvel of a modern pilot helment has little to do with the plane. Avionics in all planes can be adjusted and upgraded to use them with various degrees of effort. The avionics are not necessarily unique to the F-35. Stealth and BVR is very much overrated IMO. They have never been proven in a large scale air war. BVR is cool in a big empty space, but not all fronts will look like the Iraqi desert. If the F-35 is using its radar then everyone know it's there. Perhaps there are ways to rely on a remote, linked radar, potentially good, but lets see how it works in reality. F-35 radar is not immune to EW. So the enemy plane ahead may have a problem to get a lock on the F-35, but so will the F-35, and just let me remind you that EW can come from may sources, not only the self-defense systems of the plane it is fighting. EW is a big unknown, so it is hard to tell how it will perform in a real war.

There are more issues with the F-35, but the end result is that it does not really bring anything really new to the table except stealth of questionable usefulness per cost and short runways ability which may be important to some services. Avionics and weapons can be installed on other platforms as well.

I am not the one impressed by the neo-soviet fighters. If they try to pull such cobra moves in a multi-plane dogfight everyone around will die laughing.

[icepac]

Is there another plane of it's capability that can retain it's stealth while carrying nearly as much ord as the F35.

[smoe]

Have to remember that early in WWII the Japanese Zero fighter was thought to be one of the deadliest fighters. Everyone was clamoring about how it could out maneuver everything and why did the USA not go that way. Fact is most fighter pilots would not care to go to battle in a Zero.

Performing fancy maneuvers in a plane doesn't make it the most desirable plane for combat.

[GScholz]

USAF Lt Col Lee Kloos, commander of the 58th Fighter Squadron, was the first non-test pilot to start his transition over to the F-35A. He has 2000 hours on the F-16, and is a Weapons School graduate:

"One of the things this aircraft usually takes hit on is the handling because it's not an F-22. An F-22 is unique in its ability to maneuver and we'll never be that. But compared to other aircraft, a combat-configured F-35 probably edges out other existing designs carrying a similar load-out. When I'm downrange in Badguyland that's the configuration I need to have confidence in maneuvering, and that's where I think the F-35 starts to edge out an aircraft like the F-16.

A combat-configured F-16 is encumbered with weapons, external fuel tanks, and electronic countermeasures pods that sap the jet's performance. You put all that on, I'll take the F-35 as far as handling characteristic and performance, that's not to mention the tactical capabilities and advancements in stealth. It's of course way beyond what the F-16 has currently.

The F-35's acceleration is very comparable to a Block 50 F-16. Again, if you cleaned off an F-16 and wanted to turn and maintain Gs and turn rates, then I think a clean F-16 would certainly outperform a loaded F-35. But if you compared them at combat loadings, the F-35 I think would probably outperform it."

[eagl]

Is there another plane of it's capability that can retain it's stealth while carrying nearly as much ord as the F35.

The F-18 with the stealth weapons pod and F-15E silent eagle will be able to carry a comparable payload with reduced RCS.  The F-35 is not rear-aspect stealthy, so its stealth advantage is not as great as you might think.  I don't think the F-35 can carry all that much internally.  A couple of JDAM and 2 missiles if I recall correctly.

[GScholz]

Reduced RCS is not in the same ballpark as the F-35. The F-35 has a smaller RCS than the B-2 bomber, and about half that of the F-117. Compared to an F-16 or F-18 the RCS size difference is in the thousands. Even its rear aspect RCS if significantly less than non-stealth aircraft as it is only the engine that is not stealthed.

What an F-35 looks like to radar:

[Rich46yo]

Israel is, and has been since Yom Kippur War, actually since 1949, the biggest recipient of American foreign military aid of any other country. There is no reason to get into politics cause that is simply fact. It is also simply fact that the stat of Israel would not even exist if not for American assistance. Again...fact!

I will not go into politics, but the American tax payer you mentioned is not funding Israel as much as it is subsidizing its own military industries.

Yes, blah, blah, blah. Which we are basically doing for our own defense and defense of allied nations as well. Defense Industry's Do present a bill and people DO need to work. America and her cousins in Democracy, including Israel, have subsidized their own defense Industrys as well.

The Helmet has as much to do with the airplane as any other system on it. They have all been not only designed to work together but also all the other assets networks in. The F-35 was not designed to operate in isolation. ANY system is designed to operate with others, each system has its place, the concept is call Battle Management. There is no more WW1 or WW2 style operations. An enemy country is going to get hit with the whole shebang at once. Opening night attacks will consist of entirely 100% precision munitions. Air space will be cleared not only by ATA operations but by getting their entire ATA networks attacked and destroyed.

Dude you have to seriously learn about the avionics of the airframe before posting such stuff. Networked air space management is not a new concept. Here AN/APG-81 radar, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1NrFZddihQ&list=PLxYF2Xt6-JqGp-LHnQucGbtbQTBdsnFp2, http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/issue/feature/1145.html#.UdByPpyBrNU. Im sorry but I just cant go on with this. How in heck does Iraqi air differ from air elsewhere in the world? Air is air.

Stealth and BVR is very much overrated IMO. They have never been proven in a large scale air war.

Rich46yo, did you look at the wikipedia link? it was for the definition of the expression "white elephant", not to any information about planes.

I will not go into politics, but the American tax payer you mentioned is not funding Israel as much as it is subsidizing its own military industries. The foreign military aid is a byproduct, but of course no government will dare to present it this way. The foreign aid is a strong tool used to support various american interests abroad, but most of all to shield its own industries from foreign competition. I will not go into details because they are complicated and likely to start a flame that will get this thread locked.

The marvel of a modern pilot helment has little to do with the plane. Avionics in all planes can be adjusted and upgraded to use them with various degrees of effort. The avionics are not necessarily unique to the F-35. Stealth and BVR is very much overrated IMO. They have never been proven in a large scale air war. BVR is cool in a big empty space, but not all fronts will look like the Iraqi desert. If the F-35 is using its radar then everyone know it's there. Perhaps there are ways to rely on a remote, linked radar, potentially good, but lets see how it works in reality. F-35 radar is not immune to EW. So the enemy plane ahead may have a problem to get a lock on the F-35, but so will the F-35, and just let me remind you that EW can come from may sources, not only the self-defense systems of the plane it is fighting. EW is a big unknown, so it is hard to tell how it will perform in a real war.

There are more issues with the F-35, but the end result is that it does not really bring anything really new to the table except stealth of questionable usefulness per cost and short runways ability which may be important to some services. Avionics and weapons can be installed on other platforms as well.

I am not the one impressed by the neo-soviet fighters. If they try to pull such cobra moves in a multi-plane dogfight everyone around will die laughing.

[artik]

Hang weapons and fuel on all those aircraft and the F-35 will be second only to the F-22 in performance. "Air show mode" performance is irrelevant.

Small note, all T/W calculations take loaded weight - at least in some references it says explicitly - with full internal fuel and A/A weapons.

Also most of A/A ammunition is not that heavy, it may change the numbers a little but it would change them for F-35 as well.

Note: it is fully reasonable to manage A2A combat without bombs and fuel tanks