Dogfight : F35 vs F16

[Vulcan]

'
The never ending software issues are the result of concurrency and unparalleled scrutiny. You will find that the previous generation of planes had plenty of equally silly issues. Concurrency is the other big factor.

As for two F-35's going toe to toe with say, Su-35's.....the F-35 will walk away with the curb stomp. No AWACS is needed. If you want to compare Pak-Fa to a F-35, that is a much more even contest. But the PakFa is a F-22 "ish" plane. That comparison would be silly.

If you are in a non-stealth plane and go up against a stealth plane in even numbers: you will lose unless you are fighting planes driven by trained monkeys. Due to the difference in RCS, they will see you first. This means that they can position themselves to further reduce your other capabilities, and make detection more or less impossible until it is too late. The first warning you will get is a AMRAAM is the face. AWACS and data sharing just makes this a even more forgone conclusion.

F-117 was stealthy and it still got shot down.

If I understand correctly, the F-35 has to slow down to fire missiles, it has to open a bay to shoot its missiles (which is how the Yugoslavians took down the 117) if it loses its AWACS then it has to actively use its radar. Sounds like stealth goes out the window fairly quickly.

Not to mention in 2011 the Chinese hacked Lockheed (thanks to RSA) and stole a whole lot of info on the F35.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

[morfiend]

F35 is obsolete before it's deployed!

   I have one word to end this.........DRONES.....

  I figure I have been training future fighter pilots for about 10 years now!

   In Canada we are hardening our igloos against all this nonsense..... Soon our PM will be issuing joysticks and plans to put a drone in every back yard,at the price of 1 F35 we could equip every man woman and child in the country with their own self-defense DRONE!....



   

[GScholz]

F-117 was stealthy and it still got shot down.

If I understand correctly, the F-35 has to slow down to fire missiles, it has to open a bay to shoot its missiles (which is how the Yugoslavians took down the 117) if it loses its AWACS then it has to actively use its radar. Sounds like stealth goes out the window fairly quickly.

Not to mention in 2011 the Chinese hacked Lockheed (thanks to RSA) and stole a whole lot of info on the F35.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

It is true that the F-117 shot down by the Serbs was spotted on radar when it opened its bomb bay doors, but they were only open for a few seconds. However, this allowed the Serbs to visually track the F-117 with a modified SA-3 SAM system which uses radio command guided missiles. Several missiles were fired and one detonated close enough to fatally damage the F-117.

The shoot down was as much a failure of USAF planning as it was the credit of the Serb SAM battery commander. Zoltán and his missile crews guessed the flight paths of earlier F-117s from occasional visual and radar spotting and judging from this information and what target had just been bombed, Zoltán and his missile battery determined the probable flight path of F-117.

That's the only F-117 lost to enemy action. 9 years earlier the same aircraft and many like it flew with complete impunity over Iraq and a much better and denser air defense network. F-117s flew more than 1300 sorties and destroyed more than 1600 high value targets. 40% of the total of strategic targets destroyed in the Gulf War... by the small force of 36 F-117s.

[GScholz]

Gscholz, is there no issues then with firing LOAL missiles then from internal bays while maneuvering? 

I have no idea. If there are limitations they are highly classified for obvious reasons.

[nrshida]

F-117 was stealthy and it still got shot down.

Allegedly this F-117 had also used exactly the same entry route time and time again. Like fishing in a drainpipe. 

[Squire]

Even nations that cannot in reality afford to make stealth jets are attempting to do so

But not replace interceptors, close air support and strike with one air frame. They (Russians and Chinese) are not seeking to do that. Not so far anyways. 

...You guys seem well impressed with short range missiles like ASRAAM. That's fine...but you can take an ASRAAM and screw it onto an F-5E. The ASRAAM does not make the F-35 a great fighter.

F-35s achilles heel is the design criteria that forced a VSTOL-Stealth design when they should have made a dedicated Stealth fighter-bomber and kept the F-22 for air superiority. It would have cost less and it would not have been required to replace everything from Mach 2+ F-15s and F-18s to low and slow (and cheaper) A-10s. The "one plane can do it all" was a BAD idea from a cost and practical perspective.

...The one-off F-117 shoot down does not impress me either I will say. Does not prove that stealth isn't valuable.

Drones? they look great until you robot air force gets hosed when the data link is destroyed or disrupted. Drones are a gimmick. You can put a man in the cockpit of a low cost attack plane instead and buy a lot of them. F*** drones.

[Vulcan]

...The one-off F-117 shoot down does not impress me either I will say. Does not prove that stealth isn't valuable.

Stealth is valuable. But you have to take in reference to what else is going on, and if you rely on it entirely you do so at your peril.

Right through this thread you see the phrase "but the F-35 is stealthy you won't see it". Yet it is highly likely the Chinese have all the information they need to know the F35 inside out. Look at the rumoured Donald Cook Aegis shutdown in the Black Sea.. who makes Aegis and got hacked by the Chinese

Like I said, a house of cards.

[GScholz]

The "one plane that can do it all" is the right choice from a strategic point of view. And all major wars are won or lost on the strategic level. Imagine two evenly matched countries going to war. Both countries have air forces of 100 aircraft, but their strategies are different: Country A has developed one plane that can do it all, albeit not as good in any one role as a specialized singe role aircraft. Country B has developed specialized aircraft for each role. They have 25 air superiority fighters, 25 bombers, 25 close air support planes, and 25 recce/ESM/ECM planes.

Day one: Country B's 25 air superiority fighters face off against 100 multi-role fighter/bombers in A2A config and lose... Badly. Though their specialized fighters are somewhat better pound for pound, they can't handle 4-1 odds. The rest of country B's air force is destroyed in short order having lost its fighter component.

Day two: Country A's surviving multi-role aircraft switch roles to recce and air-to-mud and operate unopposed against enemy ground forces and strategic/political targets.

Country B loses the war.

[nrshida]

The F-117 basically only had stealth going for it and still only one was shot down in its operational history after doing something even an amateur poacher knows better than to do. I don't believe the F-35 IS putting all its eggs into the stealth basket. It's a component of a broader approach and a well-thought out one.

I think it's odd the people attacking the programme hold some illusion they are free from some odious Lockheed Martin / Governmental brain washing and yet are apparently similarly brain washed in the other direction. Where does the energy or motivation come from to be so belligerent about this programme and aircraft?

[Squire]

Well I have an alternate war.

Country A with its "one-plane-does-it-all" air force ends up affording 100 fighters. Country B designs and purchases more affordable planes and ends up with 200 assorted types. Also Country B can produce their planes more quickly than Country As high-end superfighters.

Now run the war again.

I will say this again. This Holy Grail of every piece of military gear having to be some techno marvel; especially planes and ships...is going to be ruinous at some point. Nobody it seems asked the question "is there quality in quantity?"...how about twice the number and make them good but not the absolute technological high end at staggering costs.

You see that article with the OV-10 Broncos being sortied against ISIS? Now there is an idea.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/ov-10-broncos-were-sent-to-fight-isis-and-they-kicked-a-1764407068

Although this is exciting news for the OV-10, it is also a reminder of just how inept the Pentagon has been when it comes to providing sustainable, effective and affordable air support over the last 15 years.

...somebody has it figured out. I'm sure the program will be axed as soon as the shooting stops. Then they can all get back to a "proper air force"...and all that.

Why be critical of the F-35? because it embodies all that is wrong with modern procurement.

[Toad]

Generally Military's are pretty vocal when they dont like their equipment.

The true strengths and weaknesses of the F-35 are not going to be detailed in any public arena.

The specifics of how the plane actually performs at Red Flag or any other exercise is going to be highly classified information. No one...not the manufacturer, the services or the people who fly them are going to give the enemy that kind of advantage.

These are things, as Eagle pointed out, that are discussed in an SCIF.

I suspect you don't have access to that sort of information. Tell me I'm wrong.

[GScholz]

Well I have an alternate war.

Country A with its "one-plane-does-it-all" air force ends up affording 100 fighters. Country B designs and purchases more affordable planes and ends up with 200 assorted types. Also Country B can produce their planes more quickly than Country As high-end superfighters.

Now run the war again.

Then it will be a walkover with the 100 6th generation F-35s slaughtering the 4.5 generation Gripens or Flankers or whatever you care to put in your 200 "affordable planes" category. And they're not that much more affordable either. You won't get 200 Gripen E for the price of 100 F-35s, and that's probably the cheapest 4.5 gen fighter available right now. Still cost the Brazilians $4.5 billion to get 36 of them. That's $125 million per plane.

[Zimme83]

Brazil has ordered the NG, that has very little in common with the Gripen C. Dont fall into the trap of comparing the two.

[Squire]

Then it will be a walkover with the 100 6th generation F-35s slaughtering the 4.5 generation Gripens or Flankers or whatever you care to put in your 200 "affordable planes" category

So the Lockheed brochures say, ya. But I remind you that the F-35 is NOT a dedicated air superiority fighter.

...There is also the common theme here that the F-35 is just going to be fighting other planes in some antiseptic Battle of Britain style fight. It's tasked for strike and CAS as well. Tasks that by their very nature put aircraft at high risk. Interceptors, SAMS, AAA, all that crap.

[shift8]

The true strengths and weaknesses of the F-35 are not going to be detailed in any public arena.

The specifics of how the plane actually performs at Red Flag or any other exercise is going to be highly classified information. No one...not the manufacturer, the services or the people who fly them are going to give the enemy that kind of advantage.

These are things, as Eagle pointed out, that are discussed in an SCIF.

I suspect you don't have access to that sort of information. Tell me I'm wrong.

No I dont have information from SCIF.....

But the USAF doesn't have to spell out every specific problem to complain about the plane either. If it does badly at a red flag, they can say so without spelling out every technical reason why. Just like how when the F-22 goes on a rape festival at red flag they dont name out every technical reason it did so either.

My original point still stands. You cannot argue from a vacuum where everything the govt says is a lie, so that it can suit your POV.