Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

Innominate

Well-Known member
Jun 23, 2021
1,588
994
California
It makes more sense for the Swiss to only consider what's currently available. Maybe they think the F-35 will be operationally ready by the time they get their first jet.
It is already operationally ready you skidmark.

Man you're really a piece of work I've never seen anyone like you who is so sure of his own BS. I bet you're one of those fellas that thinks the IAF is superior to chicom air force, eh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,622
11,339
India
It is already operationally ready you skidmark.

Man you're really a piece of work I've never seen anyone like you who is so sure of his own BS. I bet you're one of those fellas that thinks the IAF is superior to chicom air force, eh?

:ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

The F-35 is considered ready to go into battle only after operational testing is complete. It's not even begun yet. And without operational testing, even FRP cannot be cleared. So until FRP begins, you can consider the F-35 as still in development.

Dude, this subject is far, far beyond your understanding.

In a setback for the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter program, the U.S. Department of Defense has formally decreed that a decision on full-rate production of the jet is on indefinite hold. The Milestone C decision on whether or not to ramp up the manufacture of Joint Strike Fighters had been due in or before March 2021, but has now been on hold pending completion of the final phase of operational testing of the F-35.

The Pentagon won’t declare the F-35 to have completed development for a few months more at least, but even when that happens and the program is declared ready for full-rate production, there won’t be a big jump in the jets coming off the production line, the program office reported.

In October 2019, Lord extended the IOT&E completion and full rate decision from December 2019 to January 2020, and then to March 2020. She granted another extension in August to March 2021, saying she had “high confidence” of meeting that date because “we have the entire government/industry team focused on that.”

And now, it's on indefinite hold. Cheers.

You're such a piece of shit.

Sorry, not referring to you.
Asked by a reporter on Jan. 14 for his thoughts about the F-35, then-Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller referred to his department’s largest weapon system program as a “piece of shit.”

That's your Defence Secretary saying it, not me.

This topic is far beyond you.
 

Ashwin

Agent_47
Staff member
Administrator
Nov 30, 2017
5,484
9,094
Bangalore

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
3,834
4,447
74
France
  • Haha
Reactions: suryakiran

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
14,636
2,820
The Typhoon's supercruise is superior to the Rafale's. It can go faster while carrying 2 tanks. And it can even even pull higher Gs at higher speeds.

Its ability to supercruise, a larger and more powerful radar than the Rafale's and a longer range missile like the C7 is what gave the Typhoon the edge in IAF's MMRCA when it came to A2A. But the IAF is happier with the Rafale because it is capable of SEAD/DEAD, nuclear strike, deep penetration strike, has significantly superior recce capability etc, and with lower costs. All of which gives the Rafale the overall edge, including the fact that the Rafale is better than the Typhoon in the WVR fight.

The first Swiss tender also came to the same conclusions.

The Rafale needs only 1 such tank to match the F-35's range in combat conditions. The Rafale's basic range is 2500Km without any external fuel, which includes taxiing, taking off and climbing to altitude. Just one external tank should easily take care of that and still give the Rafale an extra 10 min of flying time. So with the little fuel left in the tank plus full internal fuel, the Rafale should easily exceed 3000Km. With three tanks, it easily exceeds 4000Km.

Plus you forget that the F-35 is aerodynamically compromised due to its stealth design, which is why it only has a dash speed of mach 1.6. So it suffers from more drag compared to the Rafale. Having a greater fuel fraction has not given it greater range. It is merely comparable.
The Rafale's supercruise ability has been embellished though. The Typhoon was quoted at M1.5 with just AAMs by Austria, at the time Rafale was only quoted at M1.3 clean, that then became M1.4 and later M1.4 with a tank. It's garbage, the Typhoon has 20% more thrust at a more swept wing, if a Typhoon can only do M1.5 more or less clean, there's stuff all chance of a Rafale reaching M1.4 with a drop tank.

WVR claims are unproven, they are different animals, a good pilot is the difference. The Typhoon has the lower wing loading and better energy conservation though and it also has ASRAAM and HMD, which kind of renders all that moot anyway.

Nah, it concluded that the Rafale was better on ECM and SA, there was nothing about WVR, the Typhoon won on engagement, which is the closest related term.

The fuel fractions, BPR, wing profile and internal stowage say otherwise.

That's solely due to the intake design and BPR, which is superior for cruise and worse for supersonic but at low supersonic speeds, the difference is very little. It should also be pointed out that the Rafale has no ramp on the intakes, another reason why the M1.4 claim is a fraud.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
14,636
2,820
Americans still believe they invented everything :ROFLMAO:
Actually the article just says it was installed in an F-18C for the first time. It is the French who believe they invented everything, they only give the Americans credit for inventing losing in Vietnam, but actually the French invented that too.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,622
11,339
India
The Rafale's supercruise ability has been embellished though. The Typhoon was quoted at M1.5 with just AAMs by Austria, at the time Rafale was only quoted at M1.3 clean, that then became M1.4 and later M1.4 with a tank. It's garbage, the Typhoon has 20% more thrust at a more swept wing, if a Typhoon can only do M1.5 more or less clean, there's stuff all chance of a Rafale reaching M1.4 with a drop tank.

The drop tank's gonna be empty.

WVR claims are unproven, they are different animals, a good pilot is the difference. The Typhoon has the lower wing loading and better energy conservation though and it also has ASRAAM and HMD, which kind of renders all that moot anyway.

CCC.

Nah, it concluded that the Rafale was better on ECM and SA, there was nothing about WVR, the Typhoon won on engagement, which is the closest related term.

WVR was confirmed through other exercises. Like the one in Corsica.

That's solely due to the intake design and BPR, which is superior for cruise and worse for supersonic but at low supersonic speeds, the difference is very little. It should also be pointed out that the Rafale has no ramp on the intakes, another reason why the M1.4 claim is a fraud.

You are free to consider it fraud. Air forces believe it though, including the Swiss. That's more than enough.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,622
11,339
India
"The F-35 is not suitable for emergency lift-off,” the Japanese defense ministry told Kyodo News.

Weirdly, this is what the Swiss bought the jet for.
 

Innominate

Well-Known member
Jun 23, 2021
1,588
994
California
"The F-35 is not suitable for emergency lift-off,” the Japanese defense ministry told Kyodo News.

Weirdly, this is what the Swiss bought the jet for.
Lol. David Axe? Really? And he just like you are little late on the reporting but nice try.
Btw why don't you post the article and not just the headline? Dope.
-
Japan denies report that it’s scrambling fewer fighter jets against Chinese military aircraft
By MATTHEW M. BURKE AND HANA KUSUMOTO | STARS AND STRIPES Published: March 5, 2021
Japan’s Ministry of Defense has denied reports that it is scrambling fewer fighter jets against Chinese military aircraft infringing on Japanese airspace due to an increased reliance on the F-35 stealth fighter.
Japan reportedly has a “new restrictive policy” that only authorizes the scrambling of fighters against Chinese aircraft that threaten to violate the country’s airspace, Japan’s Kyodo news agency reported Wednesday, citing unnamed Japanese government sources.

Under the new policy, the Japan Self-Defense Force, using radar and early warning systems, reportedly now monitors only the nationality and route of aircraft flying in the zone that abuts Japanese airspace.
Japan’s defensive network remains on watch around the clock, according to Kyodo.

On Thursday, Japan’s Ministry of Defense pushed back, denying the report in a telephone interview with Stars and Stripes.

“Nothing has changed,” a ministry spokesman said. “We are on watch 24 hours, 365 days.”
The ministry spokesman declined to comment further. It’s customary in Japan for government spokespeople to speak to the media on condition of anonymity.

The Japan Air Self-Defense Force sortied 947 times in fiscal year 2019, down from a peak of 1,168 in 2016, Japan’s Joint Staff reported on its website. As of Dec. 31, Japanese fighters had sortied 544 times so far this fiscal year, which ends March 31.
There were 192 fewer sorties in the first nine months of fiscal year 2020 due to Chinese aircraft than during the same period the previous year, the Joint Staff reported. Kyodo reported that the reduction was due to the new policy.

Japan is upgrading its fleet to the F-35. The country had 201 F-15 fighters, as of March 31, 2020, the Air Self-Defense Force said in its most recent reporting. It also had 17 F-35A stealth fighters.

-
Japan claims that the performance of F-35A exceeds expectations and the range exceeds F-15J
2021-01-31
As the new generation main model of the US military and many of its allies, the F-35 fighter project has been controversial since the day it was born; among the various accusations against it from the outside world, short legs are one of the very common sayings. Many people believe that Lockheed Martin has always refused to disclose the performance data of any model in the F-35 series, in order to cover up some of its unsightly content, and battery life is one of them.
Among Chinese netizens, when mentioning F-35, all kinds of ridicule voices are endless. Some people firmly believe that: J-20 can sling F-35, can crush F-35, can Press the F-35 on the ground and rub it. This also produced a ridiculous logical conclusion: because the J-20 can crush the F-35-so the carrier-based J-20 can crush the F-35 carrier-so the Chinese aircraft carrier can suppress the American aircraft carrier... …

But recently, different voices have been heard from Japan. On November 18, local time, Shigeru Iwasaki, the former integrated chief of staff of the Japanese Ministry of Defense (as opposed to the chief of staff), made a very positive evaluation of the F-35A's comprehensive capabilities at an international defense exhibition: F-35A is very good to Japan. Useful, especially in intelligence gathering. In an interview, Shigeru Iwasaki said that the performance of the F-35 has exceeded the Self-Defense Force’s previous expectations because this fighter has helped Japan acquire the ability to defend against ballistic missiles.
Shigeru Iwasaki also emphasized that the endurance of F-35A fighters exceeds that of F-15J fighters. This allows F-35A fighters to adapt to more types of combat missions than F-15J fighters. In the future, many AWACS ("AWACS" Control”) task can be completed by F-35 in the future. Shigeru Iwasaki did not give specific figures on the endurance of the F-35A, and Lockheed Martin did not release any specific data on the F-35 version. However, based on this conversation, the outside world believes that there are reasons to believe that the F-35A should have a longer flight time than the F-15J.


You do know at the time of this Japan only had 17 F-35As and are still training its pilots? I would tell you to stop but I guess it's too late and you actually enjoy making yourself look like an idiot.

Nippon loves F-35. IAF is run by morons and will get its butt kicked against chicom stealth air force/J-20 which btw combat exercise against their own Flankers meaning your IAF Flankers are useless against chicom air force.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,622
11,339
India
Lol. David Axe? Really? And he just like you are little late on the reporting but nice try.
Btw why don't you post the article and not just the headline? Dope.
-
Japan denies report that it’s scrambling fewer fighter jets against Chinese military aircraft
By MATTHEW M. BURKE AND HANA KUSUMOTO | STARS AND STRIPES Published: March 5, 2021
Japan’s Ministry of Defense has denied reports that it is scrambling fewer fighter jets against Chinese military aircraft infringing on Japanese airspace due to an increased reliance on the F-35 stealth fighter.
Japan reportedly has a “new restrictive policy” that only authorizes the scrambling of fighters against Chinese aircraft that threaten to violate the country’s airspace, Japan’s Kyodo news agency reported Wednesday, citing unnamed Japanese government sources.

Under the new policy, the Japan Self-Defense Force, using radar and early warning systems, reportedly now monitors only the nationality and route of aircraft flying in the zone that abuts Japanese airspace.
Japan’s defensive network remains on watch around the clock, according to Kyodo.

On Thursday, Japan’s Ministry of Defense pushed back, denying the report in a telephone interview with Stars and Stripes.

“Nothing has changed,” a ministry spokesman said. “We are on watch 24 hours, 365 days.”
The ministry spokesman declined to comment further. It’s customary in Japan for government spokespeople to speak to the media on condition of anonymity.

The Japan Air Self-Defense Force sortied 947 times in fiscal year 2019, down from a peak of 1,168 in 2016, Japan’s Joint Staff reported on its website. As of Dec. 31, Japanese fighters had sortied 544 times so far this fiscal year, which ends March 31.
There were 192 fewer sorties in the first nine months of fiscal year 2020 due to Chinese aircraft than during the same period the previous year, the Joint Staff reported. Kyodo reported that the reduction was due to the new policy.

Japan is upgrading its fleet to the F-35. The country had 201 F-15 fighters, as of March 31, 2020, the Air Self-Defense Force said in its most recent reporting. It also had 17 F-35A stealth fighters.

-
Japan claims that the performance of F-35A exceeds expectations and the range exceeds F-15J
2021-01-31
As the new generation main model of the US military and many of its allies, the F-35 fighter project has been controversial since the day it was born; among the various accusations against it from the outside world, short legs are one of the very common sayings. Many people believe that Lockheed Martin has always refused to disclose the performance data of any model in the F-35 series, in order to cover up some of its unsightly content, and battery life is one of them.
Among Chinese netizens, when mentioning F-35, all kinds of ridicule voices are endless. Some people firmly believe that: J-20 can sling F-35, can crush F-35, can Press the F-35 on the ground and rub it. This also produced a ridiculous logical conclusion: because the J-20 can crush the F-35-so the carrier-based J-20 can crush the F-35 carrier-so the Chinese aircraft carrier can suppress the American aircraft carrier... …

But recently, different voices have been heard from Japan. On November 18, local time, Shigeru Iwasaki, the former integrated chief of staff of the Japanese Ministry of Defense (as opposed to the chief of staff), made a very positive evaluation of the F-35A's comprehensive capabilities at an international defense exhibition: F-35A is very good to Japan. Useful, especially in intelligence gathering. In an interview, Shigeru Iwasaki said that the performance of the F-35 has exceeded the Self-Defense Force’s previous expectations because this fighter has helped Japan acquire the ability to defend against ballistic missiles.
Shigeru Iwasaki also emphasized that the endurance of F-35A fighters exceeds that of F-15J fighters. This allows F-35A fighters to adapt to more types of combat missions than F-15J fighters. In the future, many AWACS ("AWACS" Control”) task can be completed by F-35 in the future. Shigeru Iwasaki did not give specific figures on the endurance of the F-35A, and Lockheed Martin did not release any specific data on the F-35 version. However, based on this conversation, the outside world believes that there are reasons to believe that the F-35A should have a longer flight time than the F-15J.


You do know at the time of this Japan only had 17 F-35As and are still training its pilots? I would tell you to stop but I guess it's too late and you actually enjoy making yourself look like an idiot.

Nippon loves F-35. IAF is run by morons and will get its butt kicked against chicom stealth air force/J-20 which btw combat exercise against their own Flankers meaning your IAF Flankers are useless against chicom air force.

You're only good for playing a banjo. So stick to that.

This is what the USAF says:
Gen. Mark Welsh, Air Force chief of staff, acknowledged the challenge caused by the curtailed F-22 fleet in an exclusive interview with Defense News.
The F-35, Welsh said, "was never designed to be the next dog fighting machine. It was designed to be the multipurpose, data-integration platform that could do all kinds of things in the air-to-ground arena including dismantle enemy, integrated, air defenses. It had an air-to-air capability, but it was not intended to be an air-superiority fighter. That was the F-22."


Stop making a fool of your own generals. The Japanese comment matches what Gen Welsh says here.
 

Innominate

Well-Known member
Jun 23, 2021
1,588
994
California
You're only good for playing a banjo. So stick to that.

This is what the USAF says:
Gen. Mark Welsh, Air Force chief of staff, acknowledged the challenge caused by the curtailed F-22 fleet in an exclusive interview with Defense News.
The F-35, Welsh said, "was never designed to be the next dog fighting machine. It was designed to be the multipurpose, data-integration platform that could do all kinds of things in the air-to-ground arena including dismantle enemy, integrated, air defenses. It had an air-to-air capability, but it was not intended to be an air-superiority fighter. That was the F-22."


Stop making a fool of your own generals. The Japanese comment matches what Gen Welsh says here.
Article from 2015? Are you effing kidding me with this? WHat kind of a moron are you?

US doesn't make one purpose fighters anymore you dope the F-22 was the last because it was designed during the cold war. The USAF is the only branch in the world that has the option to use the F-35 as they want since they are the only ones that fly the F-22 which is getting old and expensive to maintain. So guess the USAF cornerstone fighter is for ground and air superiority..?

-
“The F-35 is a cornerstone of our [tactical aircraft] capability and for our fighter capability,” he said.

U.S. and allied F-35s have already seen combat. The U.S. military has deployed the stealth jets to Europe, the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East. This week, Air Force leaders said they are experimenting with new ways to deploy the jets from separate airfields in the Pacific.

The latest round of questions about the F-35’s future arose in September when the Air Force revealed it had secretly built and flown a new type of combat aircraft called the Next Generation Air Dominance, or NGAD.

“As far as NGAD versus F-35, we’re not going to take money from the F-35 to [fund] the NGAD,” Brown said. But, Brown said the Air Force will look to take money from “other parts of the fighter force” to “help fund” the NGAD project.

USAF didn't want the F-15EX instead they wanted 72 new fighters/F-35's a year but due to politics, covid and a SecDef, that at the time was a former Boeing CEO, the F-15EX was forced upon them to replace aging F-15c that was supposed to last until 2030 being replaced by F-35s.

-

The US Air Force doesn’t want F-15X. But it needs more fighter jets.​


RLANDO, Fla. — The U.S. Air Force wants more fighters. But it didn’t necessarily want the F-15X, and it didn’t intend to buy any in the upcoming fiscal 2020 budget, its top two leaders confirmed Thursday.
“Our budget proposal that we initially submitted did not include additional fourth-generation aircraft,” Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson told reporters during a Feb. 28 roundtable at the Air Force Association’s Air Warfare Symposium.
Wilson’s comments confirm reporting by Defense News and other outlets who have reported that the decision to buy new F-15X aircraft was essentially forced upon the Air Force. According to sources, the Pentagon’s Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation Office was a key backer of the F-15X and was able to garner the support of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

Asked by one reporter, point blank, whether the Air Force wanted new F-15s, Wilson and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein danced around the question.

“We want to buy new airplanes,” Goldfein said.
“We want to buy 72 aircraft a year,” Wilson added.

However, the potential F-15X buy has received increased scrutiny for a number of reasons.

For one, Wilson has been vocal in dismissing reports that the Air Force had been considering purchasing an upgraded F-15.
“We are currently 80 percent fourth-gen aircraft and 20 percent fifth-generation aircraft,” she told Defense News in September. "In any of the fights that we have been asked to plan for, more fifth-gen aircraft make a huge difference, and we think that getting to 50-50 means not buying new fourth-gen aircraft, it means continuing to increase the fifth generation.”

Additionally, when Bloomberg broke the news that the Air Force would buy new F-15Xs in December, it reported that the decision was pushed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, a former Boeing executive who has since become acting defense secretary. Shanahan’s spokesman has rebutted those reports, stating that “any DoD programmatic decisions impacting Boeing were neither made nor influenced by Mr. Shanahan.”

You are either dumb as a fly turd, completely ignorant or a liar. It was the USAF that used F-35As to take on latest F-15Es with APG-82, HMD and sniperpod and it got its butt handed to them.

F-15E Strike Eagles unable to shoot down the F-35s in 8 dogfights during simulated deployment​

The U.S. Air Force F-35A fleet continues to work to declare the Lightning II IOC (initial operational capability) scheduled in the August – December timeframe.

Among the activities carried out in the past weeks, a simulated deployment provided important feedbacks about the goal of demonstrating the F-35’s ability to “penetrate areas with developed air defenses, provide close air support to ground troops and be readily deployable to conflict theaters.”

Seven F-35s deployed from Hill Air Force Base, Utah, to Mountain Home AFB, Idaho, to carry out a series of operational tests which involved local-based 4th Generation F-15E Strike Eagles belonging to the 366th Fighter Wing.

In a Q&A posted on the USAF website, Col. David Chace, the F-35 systems management office chief and lead for F-35 operational requirements at ACC, provided some insights about the activities carried out during the second simulated deployment to Mountain Home (the first was in February this year):

The fourth column shows something interesting: during the exercise, the F-35s were challenged by some F-15Es and suffered no losses.

Even though the graphic does not say whether the F-35s did shoot back at the F-15Es some analysts (noticing also the “pew pew pew” in the chart….) have suggested the JSFs achieved stunning 8:0 kill rate against the Strike Eagle.

USAF were the only ones who had a choice to use their F-35s in mostly air to ground because they thought they had that luxury in thinking their F-22s were going to be funded for years to come including upgrades close to the F-35s.

The F-35ABandC can easily defeat any Typhoon, Rafail, Flanker or chicom stealth fighter in air combat and has been used By Norway to intercept Russian aircraft including Mig-31s.

You wanna keep making yourself look like an idiot, Sanji? Instead of thinking you know about fighter aircraft stick to what YOU know best and that is being a call-center scammer!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
15,622
11,339
India
Article from 2015? Are you effing kidding me with this? WHat kind of a moron are you?

US doesn't make one purpose fighters anymore you dope the F-22 was the last because it was designed during the cold war. The USAF is the only branch in the world that has the option to use the F-35 as they want since they are the only ones that fly the F-22 which is getting old and expensive to maintain. So guess the USAF cornerstone fighter is for ground and air superiority..?

-
“The F-35 is a cornerstone of our [tactical aircraft] capability and for our fighter capability,” he said.

U.S. and allied F-35s have already seen combat. The U.S. military has deployed the stealth jets to Europe, the Asia-Pacific region and the Middle East. This week, Air Force leaders said they are experimenting with new ways to deploy the jets from separate airfields in the Pacific.

The latest round of questions about the F-35’s future arose in September when the Air Force revealed it had secretly built and flown a new type of combat aircraft called the Next Generation Air Dominance, or NGAD.

“As far as NGAD versus F-35, we’re not going to take money from the F-35 to [fund] the NGAD,” Brown said. But, Brown said the Air Force will look to take money from “other parts of the fighter force” to “help fund” the NGAD project.

USAF didn't want the F-15EX instead they wanted 72 new fighters/F-35's a year but due to politics, covid and a SecDef, that at the time was a former Boeing CEO, the F-15EX was forced upon them to replace aging F-15c that was supposed to last until 2030 being replaced by F-35s.

-

The US Air Force doesn’t want F-15X. But it needs more fighter jets.​


RLANDO, Fla. — The U.S. Air Force wants more fighters. But it didn’t necessarily want the F-15X, and it didn’t intend to buy any in the upcoming fiscal 2020 budget, its top two leaders confirmed Thursday.
“Our budget proposal that we initially submitted did not include additional fourth-generation aircraft,” Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson told reporters during a Feb. 28 roundtable at the Air Force Association’s Air Warfare Symposium.
Wilson’s comments confirm reporting by Defense News and other outlets who have reported that the decision to buy new F-15X aircraft was essentially forced upon the Air Force. According to sources, the Pentagon’s Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation Office was a key backer of the F-15X and was able to garner the support of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

Asked by one reporter, point blank, whether the Air Force wanted new F-15s, Wilson and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein danced around the question.

“We want to buy new airplanes,” Goldfein said.
“We want to buy 72 aircraft a year,” Wilson added.

However, the potential F-15X buy has received increased scrutiny for a number of reasons.

For one, Wilson has been vocal in dismissing reports that the Air Force had been considering purchasing an upgraded F-15.
“We are currently 80 percent fourth-gen aircraft and 20 percent fifth-generation aircraft,” she told Defense News in September. "In any of the fights that we have been asked to plan for, more fifth-gen aircraft make a huge difference, and we think that getting to 50-50 means not buying new fourth-gen aircraft, it means continuing to increase the fifth generation.”

Additionally, when Bloomberg broke the news that the Air Force would buy new F-15Xs in December, it reported that the decision was pushed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, a former Boeing executive who has since become acting defense secretary. Shanahan’s spokesman has rebutted those reports, stating that “any DoD programmatic decisions impacting Boeing were neither made nor influenced by Mr. Shanahan.”

You are either dumb as a fly turd, completely ignorant or a liar. It was the USAF that used F-35As to take on latest F-15Es with APG-82, HMD and sniperpod and it got its butt handed to them.

F-15E Strike Eagles unable to shoot down the F-35s in 8 dogfights during simulated deployment​

The U.S. Air Force F-35A fleet continues to work to declare the Lightning II IOC (initial operational capability) scheduled in the August – December timeframe.

Among the activities carried out in the past weeks, a simulated deployment provided important feedbacks about the goal of demonstrating the F-35’s ability to “penetrate areas with developed air defenses, provide close air support to ground troops and be readily deployable to conflict theaters.”

Seven F-35s deployed from Hill Air Force Base, Utah, to Mountain Home AFB, Idaho, to carry out a series of operational tests which involved local-based 4th Generation F-15E Strike Eagles belonging to the 366th Fighter Wing.

In a Q&A posted on the USAF website, Col. David Chace, the F-35 systems management office chief and lead for F-35 operational requirements at ACC, provided some insights about the activities carried out during the second simulated deployment to Mountain Home (the first was in February this year):

The fourth column shows something interesting: during the exercise, the F-35s were challenged by some F-15Es and suffered no losses.

Even though the graphic does not say whether the F-35s did shoot back at the F-15Es some analysts (noticing also the “pew pew pew” in the chart….) have suggested the JSFs achieved stunning 8:0 kill rate against the Strike Eagle.

USAF were the only ones who had a choice to use their F-35s in mostly air to ground because they thought they had that luxury in thinking their F-22s were going to be funded for years to come including upgrades close to the F-35s.

The F-35ABandC can easily defeat any Typhoon, Rafail, Flanker or chicom stealth fighter in air combat and has been used By Norway to intercept Russian aircraft including Mig-31s.

You wanna keep making yourself look like an idiot, Sanji? Instead of thinking you know about fighter aircraft stick to what YOU know best and that is being a call-center scammer!

So you're saying Gen Welsh is a liar. :ROFLMAO:

Good going. The more you post, the more of an idiot you become.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bon Plan

Bon Plan

Senior member
Dec 1, 2017
2,465
1,123
France
Also interesting, 36 F-35 cots 5.1 billion Fr. At least 2 billion less then the other candidates.
NO.
The 30 years total costs is 2 billion less than the second one. 15.5 billion versus 17.5. Not the same thing my little average US guy.
 

Bon Plan

Senior member
Dec 1, 2017
2,465
1,123
France
The fat ones (2000L) can't even go supersonic, only the 1250L one can. The Rafale in the second picture - as loaded - would probably struggle to outperform a MiG-15.
False.
A Rafale with 2 x 2000L is able to reach mach 1.6 (with AB). It has been tested for years.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
14,636
2,820
False.
A Rafale with 2 x 2000L is able to reach mach 1.6 (with AB). It has been tested for years.
It only does M1.8 clean, and it wouldn't out-turn a MiG-15 in that configuration.

The 2000L tanks are not qualified to go supersonic.
 

Bon Plan

Senior member
Dec 1, 2017
2,465
1,123
France
The Rafale's supercruise ability has been embellished though. The Typhoon was quoted at M1.5 with just AAMs by Austria, at the time Rafale was only quoted at M1.3 clean, that then became M1.4 and later M1.4 with a tank. It's garbage, the Typhoon has 20% more thrust at a more swept wing, if a Typhoon can only do M1.5 more or less clean, there's stuff all chance of a Rafale reaching M1.4 with a drop tank.

WVR claims are unproven, they are different animals, a good pilot is the difference. The Typhoon has the lower wing loading and better energy conservation though and it also has ASRAAM and HMD, which kind of renders all that moot anyway.

Nah, it concluded that the Rafale was better on ECM and SA, there was nothing about WVR, the Typhoon won on engagement, which is the closest related term.

The fuel fractions, BPR, wing profile and internal stowage say otherwise.

That's solely due to the intake design and BPR, which is superior for cruise and worse for supersonic but at low supersonic speeds, the difference is very little. It should also be pointed out that the Rafale has no ramp on the intakes, another reason why the M1.4 claim is a fraud.
Rafale spec.PNG

It only does M1.8 clean, and it wouldn't out-turn a MiG-15 in that configuration.

The 2000L tanks are not qualified to go supersonic.
It is limited to mach 1.8 for economic reasons.
Rafale A, heavier and with less power, reached mach 2.

2000L tanks are not made to be supersonic, but they made that trial to prove that Rafale is not underpowered.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
14,636
2,820
The drop tank's gonna be empty.



CCC.



WVR was confirmed through other exercises. Like the one in Corsica.



You are free to consider it fraud. Air forces believe it though, including the Swiss. That's more than enough.
So you're saying the drop tank has been dropped? Then it isn't with the drop tank.

Higher instability margin.

By Rafale blog?

Clearly they don't though. Look at the original eval, so flaunted by the French:

A/C Performance out of 9.0:

Rafale - 7.0
Typhoon - 9.0

Engagement:

Rafale - 7.1
Typhoon - 7.8

Pilot Workload (also relevant in dogfighting):

Rafale - 8.0
Typhoon - 9.0

That does not seem to say M1.4 with tank and AAMs vs M1.5 with AAMs, nor does it seem to say Rafale wins in dogfights. The very opposite, the Rafale won on EW, and by having a PESA radar.
View attachment 20183

It is limited to mach 1.8 for economic reasons.
Rafale A, heavier and with less power, reached mach 2.

2000L tanks are not made to be supersonic, but they made that trial to prove that Rafale is not underpowered.
It can supercruise with 4 AAMs and a drop tank, and can do M1.4 with 6 AAMs it what it says, not M1.4 with AAMs and drop tank. And that's mostly French garbage anyway, not independent.
 

Bon Plan

Senior member
Dec 1, 2017
2,465
1,123
France

And Switzerland explaining F35 to be the cheapest solution.... :ROFLMAO:

As far as we know, LM only gave a 10 years "warranty' on the sustainment costs. It will be interesting to see the last 20 years.
But with a single engine, the alps, and the reliability of the bird, how many Swiss air force F35 remaining after 10 years.... ???
 

Innominate

Well-Known member
Jun 23, 2021
1,588
994
California

And Switzerland explaining F35 to be the cheapest solution.... :ROFLMAO:

As far as we know, LM only gave a 10 years "warranty' on the sustainment costs. It will be interesting to see the last 20 years.
But with a single engine, the alps, and the reliability of the bird, how many Swiss air force F35 remaining after 10 years.... ???
It must have been a shock for you that your cute little plane that you thought was cheaper and better in performance is actually not, huh? How's your depression have you been able to move on yet? All I gotta say it aint over and you're likely in for another shock when in a few months Finland selects the F-35. Just remember every time the Rafail goes up against the F-35 it loses. Rafail is only good enough for poor-ish nations where the F-35 isn't offered. I've enjoyed reading your friends woes at airdefense.net their denial of Swiss selecting F-35 is delicious.

🐸
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMD