Author Topic: Latest Russian fighter demo  (Read 4231 times)

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #105 on: February 01, 2014, 01:19:07 PM »
Also, on the F-35B, why does the lift fan door open parallel to the aircraft's airframe.  It seems that it's acting as a huge airbrake.  Wouldn't it have been more efficient at getting to flying speed if the doors opened in a clamshell configuration?

It acts as a scoop for the lift fan.


« Last Edit: February 01, 2014, 01:23:07 PM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline DaveBB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #106 on: February 01, 2014, 02:46:19 PM »
Form does follow function.  I was only able to get data on the F-35C, it has a 4 degree higher AoA when landing than the F/A-18.  Not too big of a deal.  Its rated for a nominal 12fps impact into the flight deck, with 18fps impact being the maximum sustainable.
Currently ignoring Vraciu as he is a whoopeeed retard.

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #107 on: February 01, 2014, 02:58:59 PM »
Form does follow function.  I was only able to get data on the F-35C, it has a 4 degree higher AoA when landing than the F/A-18...

So what? The F-16 has an AoA of up to 7 degrees more than the F/A-18 when landing. What does this statistic have to do with, well anything?
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #108 on: February 02, 2014, 12:06:59 AM »
Eagl... Don't you think you're being more than slightly hypocritical? The F-15SE over the F-35? Seriously?

For specific needs of the Korean AF and USAF air defense requirements, no, not at all.  Our F-15s are still required for air defense and for day 2 of any offensive war, and the F-35 can't replace the F-15E.  There are a hundred dead pilots whose remains are scattered on the Nevada desert floor who tried to do low altitude night precision weapon delivery in a single seat fighter.  Some missions need a second crewmember in the aircraft.  We have nothing on the books to replace the F-15E, so it is shortsighted to think that we can replace the few hundred F-15Es we have with a smaller number of F-35s, no matter how nice the avionics are.

Korea found out that they could order nearly double the number of F-15SEs than F-35s, and in a war with N. Korea the IADS would be degraded QUICKLY, after which they need more fighters, not less.  Smaller numbers of F-35s aren't going to help win that war.  They have a valid requirement for a reduced observable bomb truck like the F-15SE though, especially since it can be reconfigured from its low observable configuration to a hugely capable bomb truck just by swapping the CFTs.  And they could have gotten exactly what they needed for the price they themselves set.  But someone twisted their arm and they re-wrote the tech requirements until only the F-35 could meet them, even though they know damn well they're only going to get half the number of airframes and deliveries will be delayed at least 5 years, if not more.

For air defense and beating the hell out of a country with a degraded IADS, yes I'd take the F-15SE over the F-35, because of the raw performance as an interceptor, massive maximum weapon loadout, and the mission flexibility gained by having a WSO in the back seat.

I've never said that the F-35 doesn't have a place in the lineup.  But its being oversold.  It's like a football team releasing its entire offensive line to hire 4 wide receivers, to the point where their starting line up is 7 overpaid skinny dudes and a frightened quarterback.  There's no synergy there.
Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #109 on: February 02, 2014, 12:37:22 AM »
Quote
There are a hundred dead pilots whose remains are scattered on the Nevada desert floor who tried to do low altitude night precision weapon delivery in a single seat fighter.
Do you have reference material for that statement?
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #110 on: February 02, 2014, 01:21:44 AM »
Do you have reference material for that statement?

Not with me, no.  Most of the details are privileged info anyhow.  That statement is based on 20 years of watching flying safety videos annually and reading dozens upon dozens of mishap reports during my career.  The infamous Viva Las Vegas video shown before each red flag has a dozen or more low altitude fatalities just in one 5 minute video clip, and that's just a mere handful that were caught on camera.  My spatial disorientation course during F-15E FTU had 3 cases with no video, of F-16 drivers who augered in doing night low altitude LGB deliveries.  Another CRM course I attended had 5 cases of guys who got disoriented during both daylight and night low altitude visual and PGM deliveries.  I've lost 3 friends in the last 4 years due to spatial disorientation, and one of them was even in an F-15E with a WSO in the back seat (who lived), and the very first of my friends and squadron-mates who died in my first fighter squadron hit the ground doing about 500 kts during a low altitude threat reaction at night.

100 is a low estimate for the number of attack pilots who packed it in doing low altitude combat maneuvering.  Very low.  F-16s simply don't do low altitude LGB deliveries anymore after a rash of fatalities attempting to fill that role more than a decade ago.  F-15Es still do it because we don't die quite as often doing that mission, but it requires the full attention of 2 crewmembers to even attempt to do it reasonably safely and effectively.

Rich46yo, don't take this personally, but...  I'm sure you could get some data with a well written FOIA request to the AF safety center, but I've already seen the reports.  If you choose to not believe me, frankly that's because you're not in the business and you world-view context on the subject is missing about 5 years of training/education that I can't possibly provide for you.  Like the 2 morons who only survived by a miracle after they depressurized their acft above 20,000 ft before making sure their oxygen was flowing and after their windscreen fractured (in violation of direct guidance in the acft operators manual), ignorance of aviation safety and physiology doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  It just means you don't have the education and experience to understand what's going on or what people are talking about when the subject comes up.

Again nothing personal, but the whole single seat low altitude strike argument comes up over and over by people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.  They either lack the education or experience, and they're making decisions that will get people killed due to their ignorance or ego.  That viper driver talking about how the F-16 can do it all...  Well, he hasn't done it all, otherwise he wouldn't be saying nonsense like that.  And those who claim the F-35 will replace everything including F-15, F-15E, A-10... they're saying it out of WILLFUL IGNORANCE, ignoring 70+ years of lessons learned in fighter aviation, because they think even though they haven't done it and never will, they somehow know better than those who have been there and done that.  All their charts and studies don't mean crap to the single-seat fighter pilot who's been given too much to do low to the ground and who pays for the bean-counter's inflated ego with his life.

 

Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.

Offline artik

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1907
      • Blog
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #111 on: February 02, 2014, 02:01:07 AM »
...reading dozens upon dozens of mishap reports during my career...

Are you talking about day time or night time low altitude flying?

I clearly understand how 2nd crew member is critical and improves safety. For example IAI actually wanted to participate in 2 seat F-35 version development, also all the latest procurement of fighter aircraft by IAF were dual-seaters F-15I (which is F-15E with Israeli avionics) and F-16I (F-16 Block 50/52+ with Israeli avionics) as well all come in two seat version.

However, there is long history of low altitude flying using single seat aircraft in IAF history, from operation Moked (Focus) with single seat Mirage IIIC and to the operation Opera with 8 F-16A flying at low altitude for a long time to destroy the Iraqi Nuclear reactor. From what I have read, the training for the Moked had cost lives and during the operation itself several planes had kissed the ground.

But in general, low altitude flying in single seaters was very common and AFAIK is one of the mandatory training in the Israeli air force academy.

Also I don't know what is the situation at night... that is why I ask.
Artik, 101 "Red" Squadron, Israel

Offline Plawranc

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2683
      • Youtube Channel
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #112 on: February 02, 2014, 02:47:28 AM »
As it stands the superiority in aircraft is essentially irrelevant. More important is missile technology.

And where missiles are concerned. Volume of fire x by quality of missile. More aircraft = More missiles = More kills

Essentially, if you can purchase two AIM-120 armed aircraft with comparable capability. Then you have more combat power.

If an F-15 E with the new ANM radar system costs 100 million USD (2011) and the F-35C model costs 200 million (2013 price) then that's two F-15's with EIGHT! AIM-120C's each... and considering the AMRAAM has a BVR probable kill of 50-50.... AT MAX RANGE... and at semi-long to medium range its kill ratio is roughly 90%.

You are talking about an approximate ratio of 7-8 kills for every 10 missiles fired. Even at BVR range you are looking at 5-6 kills for every 10 missiles fired. Now the F-35's advantage of stealth is nullified if it carries external weapons. To match the F-15's weapons load it would have to carry four of the missiles externally.
DaPacman - 71 Squadron RAF

"There are only two things that make life worth living. Fornication and Aviation"

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #113 on: February 02, 2014, 03:49:52 AM »
Are you talking about day time or night time low altitude flying?
Also I don't know what is the situation at night... that is why I ask.
Not all pilots in the IAF are qualified to fly NOE with night vision (at night of course...). It is considered very dangerous and training is done in as sterile conditions as possible - I don't know how familiar your are with the Israeli air volume and multitude restrictions and limitations of flying through it, plus other mission related distractions can lead to fatalities.

The IAF clearly prefers two-seaters for most of its missions including air-superiority. The Israeli F-15 squadrons dedicated to air-to-air (i.e. not E/I models) include quite a few two-seaters. Since the days of the Mosquito in WWII, the benefit of having a second crew member facing forward and participating in the mission (as opposed to facing backwards, holding a useless gun and being generally clueless about the action) was clear. The 2nd crew member allowed the mossies to go on 4-5 hours missions of low-altitude hedge-hopping across Europe in day and night. That mission profile and risks is very similar to the situation we are discussing.
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline Gman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #114 on: February 02, 2014, 05:48:06 AM »
Excellent points Eagl IMO.  Back when the RCAF flew the F104 in as an attack aircraft and interceptor, we lost over 100 of them out of 240, it was 46% as I recall, some of it because the aircraft was being asked to do things it couldn't, at least not very well or very safely.  Several of the losses happened during Red Flag with the USAF in the desert, so having 100 USAF/USN/USMC pilots along with all the allied pilots who have crashed is easy enough for me to believe.

This is a picture of the 20mm cannon left over from an RCAF F104 crash at Nellis in 1979 at Red Flag, which flew into terrain.


Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #115 on: February 02, 2014, 10:17:26 AM »
Eagl, the F-15SE may very well have been a better aircraft for the Koreans, I have no opinion on that. I was making a note of your inconsistent assessment of the capabilities of the two aircraft. While you describe the F-35 in stealth mode as "anyone going against the F-35 in the future is gonna run them out of gas", yet the F-35 carries more fuel then the F-15SE in stealth mode. You say "run them out of missiles", but you ignore the fact that the F-15SE also carries only four missiles in stealth mode. The F-15SE apparently "can carry 10 missiles in an air defense configuration", yet the F-35 can carry 40% more than that in a non-stealth A2A configuration.

And the most blatant case of hypocrisy must be this: F-35 stealth is apparently "then shoot them in their non-stealthy a$z". While for the  F-15SE apparently "stealth only has to be good enough to let you get close enough to shoot first and then escape."

Really? Seriously?

The F-15SE has very limited stealth in a direct front aspect only, and only against X-band radars. The F-15SE has a huge RCS from every other angle except dead ahead. The F-35 on the other hand has a very limited rear aspect area where the stealth in compromised by the engine; an enemy radar must be able to see the actual fan blades up the F-35's "a$z" to compromise its stealth.




You say "Plus... mach 2.5.  Seriously." Yeah, seriously Eagl... In "air show mode" and only for a couple of minutes at high altitude. Hang anything like a useful war load on it and it's a sub-Mach 2 aircraft and can't supercruise. F-35 is able to maintain Mach 1.2 without using afterburners while carrying a useful internal load of missiles and bombs and while being stealthy. Block four upgraded F-35's will feature an optimized weapon bay configuration increasing the internal missile capacity by 50%.

« Last Edit: February 02, 2014, 10:20:40 AM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Gman

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3719
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #116 on: February 02, 2014, 10:45:05 AM »
http://defensetech.org/2014/01/29/report-f-35-cracks-in-tests-isnt-reliable/

Quote
The hardware problems, along with ongoing delays in software development, among other issues, led Gilmore to conclude that the fifth-generation fighter jet’s “overall suitability performance continues to be immature, and relies heavily on contractor support and workarounds unacceptable for combat operations.”

He added, “Aircraft availability and measures of reliability and maintainability are all below program target values for the current stage of development.”

As good as the F35 could end up being, it's sure been tough slugging uphill for this thing.  It seems every month you read about some new problems they're running into.  I realize that all new fighters have trouble in testing, and have changes to their designs in response to data from testing, but the F35 sure seems to have had more than its share.  The whole article lists about a half dozen problems besides the cracks in different places in the airplane as well.  What is with manufacturers in the DOD nowadays, do they intentionally try to make things not work?  Look at the new Ford Carrier, elevators, dual band radar, Emals landing/launching system, which failed 10 percent of all test launches so far....the P8 Navy ASW aircraft which isn't working well....so many things just seem to be built very poorly from the start now.  Frustrating to the taxpayer and everyone else I'm sure.


Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #117 on: February 02, 2014, 10:49:50 AM »
Military airplane crashes are NOT privileged information. They are a matter of record. http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ Tho I didnt fly planes, you forget I was in USAF to. There have not been
Quote
a hundred dead pilots whose remains are scattered on the Nevada desert floor who tried to do low altitude night precision weapon delivery in a single seat fighter.
Not anywhere i can find, and dont worry. I dont take it personal. If you cant back up what you said then you just cant.

That a one person fighter has more to do , most of all at low level, then a Two person fighter should come to no surprise to anyone. Again here the F35 shines because of the power and ease of information delivery and situational awareness. Of course the real edge is stand off weaponry that has become the norm and not the occasional as in Gulf-1. Where ALL 4th gen and lesser planes took big chances in the grass due to 3rd rate AA. Most of all around Iraqi airfields.

And with the proliferation of much more advanced AA, some of them able to operate on their own, I cant really understand the argument for more 4th generation fighter bombers. Especially since the F15 SE has LO features designed primarily to aid ATA and not ground attack. Theres plenty of hard data to support the South Korean decision and that "arm twisting" had nothing to do with it. You cant make a 4th gen fighter a 5th gen fighter, most of all something as big as an F15, with a paint job and a small internal bay. South Korea has a very important ground attack mission and the F15 is just to vulnerable again ground based radars.

"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #118 on: February 02, 2014, 10:53:58 AM »
There are a hundred dead pilots whose remains are scattered on the Nevada desert floor...

Why can't you guys do this safely? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZyVhTo4hyE

We're not so lucky that our country is flat like a desert: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0su8Vdkajg&feature=player_detailpage#t=71

When our European friends come visit they do the same: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KoF7cm-ipU
« Last Edit: February 02, 2014, 10:55:48 AM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Latest Russian fighter demo
« Reply #119 on: February 02, 2014, 11:20:50 AM »
Even with TV personalities on board...

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clpyv8tMEDo

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuePyOT5ENc

Jan Erik Larsen is our Jeremy Clarkson and host of the car themed TV-show "Autofil" (Auto-phile). He has a very distinctive laugh...
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."