Dogfight : F35 vs F16

[Vraciu]

"While a fine bomb-hauler and (one hopes) a good multi-service airframe, the F-35 is a mediocre performer. The problem with the F-35 … is speed. It doesn’t have the capability to supercruise. Speed lets us get inside the decision cycle of the bad guy.”

- 1st Fighter Wing commander Brigadier General Burton Field

[GScholz]

 

"Now with that many aircraft delivered, we are down 57 percent from the first aircraft that was delivered, and we're on a path to be down to a price of an $85 million jet by 2019, which is comparable to a fourth generation aircraft,"

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/11/lockheed-martin-ceo-price-of-f-35-jets-down-57-percent.html

[Vraciu]

"Now with that many aircraft delivered, we are down 57 percent from the first aircraft that was delivered, and we're on a path to be down to a price of an $85 million jet by 2019, which is comparable to a fourth generation aircraft,"

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/11/lockheed-martin-ceo-price-of-f-35-jets-down-57-percent.html

Pure propaganda not supported by facts.

Average cost for the entire program of T/A-35 mistake jets is $160M each, sans engine (which is $30M).

You can dress it up any way you like it.  Best case: Average price (BEFORE depot repairs of existing and future defects) is $160M per aircraft.   Period. ($190M with an engine.)

Using the least damaging numbers available and rolling the engine into the total:

Minimum Program Cost of $400 Billion (and climbing) / 2,457 Jets = $162.8 MILLION each. 

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/16/politics/f-35-jsf-operational-costs/


For an airplane that was promised to be equal to an F-16C in acquisition and operating costs we have a jet that:

- Doesn't work.
- Has built-in defects of an unspecified cost to fix--if they can be fixed at all.
- Costs more than double per flight hour compared to the F-16C.
- Costs from five to seven times more per airplane than an F-16C.
- Is over six years behind schedule.
- Will not be combat-capable until 2022 at the earliest.
- Cannot defeat an F-16D with drop tanks in aerial combat.
- Has a dispatch reliability rate of 30 percent.

Boondoggle.


"The F-35's technology is designed to engage, shoot, and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual 'dogfighting' situations," [Lockheed Martin] said.

It is a bomb truck--or light pickup--not a fighter. 

[Vraciu]

Team Canada sees the light.  May reject the A-35 for the Super Hornet or Advanced Super Hornet.  An airplane that actually WORKS.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/show-daily/farnborough/2016/07/11/canada-f35-farnborough-kendall-no-system/86935984/

[Zeagle]

That article sited by the OP is representative of what's wrong in our military. In combat, you don't get to see if you're having a "bad g day" or not.

Remember the initial deployment of the F-22? When they had to turn around and follow the tanker home because their electronics went Tango Uniform? Not to mention the OBOX killing pilots?

And we won't even mention that stupid suicide door for the lift fan on the shipboard variant of the F-35.  It makes me think of the Yf-22/yf23 thing. And the YF-12/sr-71 thing. In the words of Ben Rich, "we built the wrong plane".

[Tilt]

Saw my first 35B being demonstrated at Fairford yesterday. It was not a spectacular display.....infact it was nearly the same demo the Harrier had given some decades ago at Farnborough ( also on this week) except of course the F35B is STOVL and not VTOL.

Hopefully it will get over its shakes in time for HMRN's aircraft carriers which are purpose designed for it.

F16's and Typhoons were a plenty.

A single F22 heralded as the greatest combat aircraft ever built............. broke halfway through its display.  Not such a great advert.

[Krusty]

Vraciu, I suggest you read more balanced (i.e. not anti-propoganda) sources and reports. You're heavily cherry picking the negative comments to reinforce your point.

I strongly suggest anybody interested in a fair reporting on the progress of the F-35 read the ARC forum thread about it. It has been going since 2010 and over 370 pages. It has had actual F-22 pilots commenting (when they can) and people with a HELL of a lot more personal first-person experience in the industry than you have.

It is a program that isn't finished yet, and we all understand that. However as the subtitle of the thread reads: It's not all doom and gloom. Almost anybody involved in actually using the plane has been praising its for it's amazing abilities that the planes it is replacing simply cannot match. That includes dogfighting and wargames.

http://www.arcforums.com/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=209836

Check it out. You don't need to sign up to the forum to read it. If you want the most recent stuff, start on the last couple of pages and if you have more time work your way backwards. I've been following it on and off since 2010, and it's a hell of a lot more balanced that most sources out there. Yes, it also discusses the engines and the overall costs and the different price points per LRIP and comparing the milestones and what they're hitting to other planes that were horribly late and badly designed (like... say... the Super Hornet).

[Vraciu]

See Rule #4

[Vraciu]

Saw my first 35B being demonstrated at Fairford yesterday. It was not a spectacular display.....infact it was nearly the same demo the Harrier had given some decades ago at Farnborough ( also on this week) except of course the F35B is STOVL and not VTOL.

Hopefully it will get over its shakes in time for HMRN's aircraft carriers which are purpose designed for it.

F16's and Typhoons were a plenty.

A single F22 heralded as the greatest combat aircraft ever built............. broke halfway through its display.  Not such a great advert.

The Raptor fleet is too small to do the job.  They're starting to get tired.  Let's hope a Gen Six jet is in the pipeline to replace both the F-22 and the T/A-35. 

[Vraciu]

That article sited by the OP is representative of what's wrong in our military. In combat, you don't get to see if you're having a "bad g day" or not.

Remember the initial deployment of the F-22? When they had to turn around and follow the tanker home because their electronics went Tango Uniform? Not to mention the OBOX killing pilots?

And we won't even mention that stupid suicide door for the lift fan on the shipboard variant of the F-35.  It makes me think of the Yf-22/yf23 thing. And the YF-12/sr-71 thing. In the words of Ben Rich, "we built the wrong plane".

Bingo. 

[DaveBB]

Here are the unfixable problems with the F-35:

(1) Wings are too small.
(2) Severe buffeting at high angles of attack.
(3) Gigantic helmet is too big and weighs too much.

[Krusty]

1) Tell that to the F-104. A wing is designed around very many different requirements. It makes enough lift for what it is designed to do. The size doesn't matter as long as it makes all the lift it needs.

2) An overly exaggerated complaint, countered by an F-16 trainer pilot with 2200+ hours in F-16s that transitioned to the F-35s and has had dogfights with F-16s in his F-35. He said it wasn't a real problem with the third generation of helmets.

3) Not really a problem. If you're referring to the ejection seat dummy tests, those were because of a forward rotation of the ejection seat, not the weight of the helmet. This is no worse a travesty than the F-16's tendency to cause chronic shoulder and upper back/neck pain in its pilots because of the tilted seat -- which was tilted based on a lie that it decreased G-effects. It didn't, it simply wouldn't fit upright. Many decades later the F-16 seats are still reclined and nobody has snapped a neck over it. Besides, there are plenty of easy fixes for that, including weight shaving and even simply shoulder/neck-strap harness rigs like Formula 1 drivers must use when they race. They save broken necks compared to non-strapped helmets. There are lots of easy fixes and a "fix" will be found.

[Gman]

F35B demo recently -  Those short wings always throwing contrails too, I'm not a fighter pilot, but doesn't this make you easier to see, and track visually, sort of a give away to your G as well?  The fighter pilot I can ask in person is away with the Snowbirds right now, maybe others here, Puma/Eagle/Serenity/etc will comment on that, but I see the A and C model do this at lower alts a lot too, not sure about mid/higher alt.

I do hope those positive comments from the USMC general I posted are true - this didn't look TOO bad so far as a low level demo goes, some pretty tight turns in the least maneuverable and worst thrust/weight/speed F35 model

[Squire]

4) Its not stealthy vs infrared detection systems.
5) Its range is short.
6) Its ordnance load is small unless it carries externally.
7) Its slow vs 5th gen fighters.
8) Its too much money.

...and so on.

[Gman]

Check out the Typhie at the same show, loaded for World War 4 - holy crap.  Looks like 2 IR AAM, Asraam I think, 4 MRM missiles on the wells, 6 Brimstones, 2 500-1000lb class LGB/GPS bombs, 2 fuel tanks, and a partridge in a pear tree.  That's insane, especially with the show it puts on.  I know the F35 with external/internal stores mix can carry a lot too, but this is impressive for the Eurofighter IMO.