Report of F35A vs F16Cblk40 goes public

[PR3D4TOR]

Time travel is cheating! 

[Squire]

completely ready or not, into combat missions sooner or later

They will bomb some insurgent in a Toyota from 35,000 feet and call it combat proven. Just wait.

[PR3D4TOR]

That will make it combat proven as a bomber at least...

[artik]

I know the Israelis have done it, but that's mostly for the sheits and giggles (very prestigious among IAF pilots).

Sorry this only shows the misunderstanding of the situation.

It isn't about "sheits and giggles" it is about having tight airspace when you get close to target the way the gun is just more effective than missile. And it very tight and crowded with tens and hundreds aircraft airspace close to Israel like Lebanon or Syria you get close not because you "want to show off" but because does not take much time to cross the entire airspace.

Quote from an interview to "Flight International" in 1982 about "Bekaa Valley Turkey Shot"

FI: Because of the area restrictions, did
you favour gun attacks rather than
missiles?
IAF: Not exclusively, but we shot down
many with guns, a big percentage with
our own Shafrir and some with all types
of the Sidewinder we have. And we used
the Sparrow. Surprisingly we had a
much higher rate of gun kills than we
expected. In such a small area with
many aircraft we had to get very close
to visually identify aircraft, as we were
in close, we used guns.

I posted the full interview there: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,372922.0.html

Gun has important role. You can get without it... but it is much better to have one.

BTW what is more disturbing is that in Stealth mode F-35 has no close in weapons like short range heat seeking missiles - that are BTW were and remain primary killing weapon of air-force.

[PR3D4TOR]

BTW what is more disturbing is that in Stealth mode F-35 has no close in weapons like short range heat seeking missiles - that are BTW were and remain primary killing weapon of air-force.

That's not accurate. F-35A (and I) in stealth mode has a 25mm gun, and can carry two IR missiles (one on each bomb bay door) and two AMRAAMs in the bomb bay itself. In a later Block upgrade the total stealth payload will be increased to six missiles; two IR and four radar (or six radar), or combinations with other ordnance (see second picture below).

Currently the British ASRAAM is the only IR missile that can be carried internally. In the near future the AIM-9X and European IRIS-T missiles will also have this capability. They first need to implement a lock-on after launch system in those missiles.

[PR3D4TOR]

The AIM-9X Block II has lock-on-after-launch capability and is in production now. It is expected to be integrated with the F-35 in 2017.

[bozon]

The AIM-9X Block II has lock-on-after-launch capability and is in production now. It is expected to be integrated with the F-35 in 2017.

Lock on after launch is very problematic. You need some other system to imagine what the missile head will see and hopefully, when the missile is dropped and wakes up, that will be correct. There are so many things that can go wrong.  A wing mounted missile is already active before it is released and that makes it much more reliable. Also, a bay missile has to drop out of the bay before it ignites so the process takes longer and is more sensitive to accelerations (G load) - not good in a tight maneuvering combat.

[artik]

Actually the video you had linked tells something very important.

Internal bay does not allow rail-launched missiles to be used without special trapez that extends the launcher so the missile can be safely rail-launched.

Looking at all close in 5th generation missiles IRIS-T, Python-5, ASRAAM, MICA and AIM-9X they are all rail-launched and their integration to stealthy F-35 isn't feasible without fully developing and testing the trapez.

What I do not understand why Lockheed didn't developed such a system in first place clearly understanding that most customers would like to integrate their close-in weapons into F-35's stealth mode - and virtually all close in weapons are rail launched - because as bozon said, in close in scenario LOAL is very problematic.

[PR3D4TOR]

Lock on after launch is very problematic. You need some other system to imagine what the missile head will see and hopefully, when the missile is dropped and wakes up, that will be correct. There are so many things that can go wrong.  A wing mounted missile is already active before it is released and that makes it much more reliable. Also, a bay missile has to drop out of the bay before it ignites so the process takes longer and is more sensitive to accelerations (G load) - not good in a tight maneuvering combat.

It is not problematic at all with the F-35's sensor fusion system. The ASRAAM is never "unguided," but is guided via data link by the launching aircraft until it locks on with its own seeker, just like with the AMRAAM. Both the British and Australians have successfully tested the ASRAAM with "over the shoulder" shots against targets behind the launching aircraft. With this missile (and other missiles in the near future) the F-35 will be able to engage targets anywhere in the sky.

The AIM-9X Block II (and future Block III) also has this capability.

[PR3D4TOR]

Now THIS is a simpit!

[Nilsen]

I bet our russian neighbours enjoys this report  So glad that my tax money is going to upgrade our air force from the F16 to the F35 bomber

They should just slap apple stickers on these planes, bump the price and sell them before its too late.

[craz07]

it will still do what the u.s. wants out of it, bomb terrorist targets, and basically nothing else... the raptor is the air superiority fighter....

[craz07]

The future of warfare will not be super power on super power, if it is, it means we're in big trouble... Having a stealth multirole fighter as opposed to the f16 is a huge advantage when fighting terrorists in 2nd or 3rd world countries fighting with older equipment.... just my opinion

[Squire]

Modern combat aircraft are designed to fight large powerful air forces and militaries...not 3rd world insurgents. You could bomb ISIS with P-47s Thunderbolts. The problem is a large scale war with an opponent that is not weak and ill equipped. Betting that you are only ever going to have to fight tinpot dictators or small tribal "terrorists" is a dangerous assumption.

[craz07]

I'm not saying they're completely ill equipped to fight modern 1st world contemporary fighters, but if you're going to be spending billions of dollars you better be spending them on what their main objective is going to be... A stealth fighter that can bob and weave through terrorist or other less advanced countries radars and anti aircraft fire and that can deliver the goods is what is needed... The f22 raptor would be the "go to" if the schit ever hit the fan with a modern superpower, even though I wonder how much fighting they would actually be doing with fighter jets if this were to actually happen... The thunderbolt would be bad news, all we need is more collateral damage to win these types of wars....