Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell

About realism in DB. The F-35 looks a bit overrated.

It has the same Climb and turnrate as a F-22 and the agility of a F-16 in the DB (1.05 B370).
The F-35 has gotten alot of flack from so called experts in various partner countries with characteristics like "Can't Climb, Can't turn, Can't run". Critisism for being too heavy, too slow and lack of agility.

While in the Command DB it's very agile and Climbs like ....

quote:

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell

About realism in DB. The F-35 looks a bit overrated.

It has the same Climb and turnrate as a F-22 and the agility of a F-16 in the DB (1.05 B370).
The F-35 has gotten alot of flack from so called experts in various partner countries with characteristics like "Can't Climb, Can't turn, Can't run". Critisism for being too heavy, too slow and lack of agility.

While in the Command DB it's very agile and Climbs like ....

It is worth noting, however, that the F-35 can out-turn and out-climb F-16s and F-18s, at least at combat speeds below .85 mach. [1] Claims of it being a pig seem to relate mostly to it's transonic acceleration, where it fall short of 4th generation birds. [2] I'm not sure how the latter would be modeled in CMANO, but it would be nice to see the F-35's take a while to get through the sound barrier. The crappy transonic acceleration is likely due to design choices that optimized RCS over high-mach airflow (Shape matters a lot- compare the F-102 to the F-106). At least according to the head of the ACC it makes the F-35 stealthier than the F-22. [3]

[1] http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-35a.htm
[2] http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/reduced-f-35-performance-specifications-may-have-significant-operational-381683/
[3] http://breakingdefense.com/2014/06/gen-mike-hostage-on-the-f-35-no-growlers-needed-when-war-starts/3/

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell
The lead designer of the F-16 says the F-16 would easily take the F-35 in a dogfight. He even calls the F-35 a turkey.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Coiler12

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell
The lead designer of the F-16 says the F-16 would easily take the F-35 in a dogfight. He even calls the F-35 a turkey.

Pierre Sprey worked on the initial requirements for the F-16, did nothing on the F-16 itself, vigorously condemned it when they added a radar and air-to-ground capability, and opposes everything more advanced than an F-5.

Sprey is also a veteran of the 1960s Pentagon and has that obvious mentality of that time, not just in technology but also in analysis. All of his analyses are focused in terms of numbers without any examination of context or what the numbers mean. This is why he viewed the F-86 as the high point of American fighter design-not because of any physical performance, but because of the (exaggerated) 10-1 victory ratio. This is also why he talks about high sortie rates as automatically good and low ones as automatically bad.

All of his histories are biased, Manichean tales of the Bomber/Bad Technology struggling to keep down the Great Lightweight CAS Fighter. So he's one of the least reliable sources for anything about military technology.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell

About realism in DB. The F-35 looks a bit overrated.

It has the same Climb and turnrate as a F-22 and the agility of a F-16 in the DB (1.05 B370).
The F-35 has gotten alot of flack from so called experts in various partner countries with characteristics like "Can't Climb, Can't turn, Can't run". Critisism for being too heavy, too slow and lack of agility.

While in the Command DB it's very agile and Climbs like ....

quote:

ORIGINAL: AFIntel

As one who's followed aviation for many years, I've learned that just about every platform has been labelled "turkey", "overrated ", etc in its prototype and early operational stages. Even the F-15 and F-16 were lambasted at points of its early life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dutchie999


I started out as a hater of the F35 just like anyone else. Very cool you know . Then I started reading, researching and thinking a bit and came to my senses. Don't get me wrong there are still things that the 'haters' out there are right about: cost, delay, concurrency etc. But the subject is a lot more complicated then: can't run, can't turn, can't climb. And please stop listening to Pierre Sprey. Been there done that. Very nice man, but he is living in another time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DismalPseudoscience

and because the later block variants from 2020 or so don't access the 6-AMRAAM internal payload they are supposedly getting, which substantially constrains their air-to-air capabilities. I understand omitting DIRCM, since that is pretty speculative though planned, but the AMRAAM payload increase is pretty firmly laid out and doesn't involve speculating about the capabilities of new and rumored systems.

The database is fantastically expansive, so the occasional weird omission or error has to be expected. But I have asked about one such anomaly (or so it seems to me) and found it was deliberate before - there is usually a reason.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell
As for Sprey, I do believe him about the F-16 outperforming the F-35 in a dogfight (Visual range combat). HOWEVER, if a Group of F-16's were to og up against a Group of F-35's I don't belive it would come to Visual range combat, but rather the F-16's falling from the sky before it comes to that.
But that's just my opinion, I'm no expert.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spookyashell
Really? I was under the impression that the F-16 was never under any serious critisism. But rather seen as a revelation from the very beginning (low cost, great capabillity).
But you have most probably read and followed development of these Crafts alot more than me.

quote:

AIM-7 Sparrow was thoroughly tested by USAF, and in R&D tests it achieved Pk of 80-90%, with operational tests resulting in Pk of 50-60%. In Vietnam, Pk dropped to 8-10%, with many US pilots firing entire AIM-7 loadout, from visual range and from perfect tail position, only to watch all missiles miss.

AIM-9B achieved 15% Pk, which increased to 19% for USN AIM-9D. USAF used AIM-9E and J which scored Pk of around 20% less than B and D models, 12% – 15% Pk. Soviet copy of AIM-9B missile, Atoll, achieved 12% Pk. Radar-guided missiles fared worse. AIM-7D achieved Pk of 8%, which increased to 10% for AIM-7E. AIM-7E2, introduced in last year of the war to correct AIM-7Es fusing problems, achieved Pk of 8%. Despite having long spin-up time, M61 20 mm rotary cannon achieved Pk of 26%.

Out-of-envelope launches only resulted in 7% of non-kills, and 46% of attempts were failures to launch or guide, compared to 30-37% failure rate of AIM-9.

In Indo-Pakistani war of 1971, Pakistani gun- and Sidewinder- -armed F-86s achieved 6:1 exchange ratio against Indian MiG-21s, Sn-7s and Hunters. Subsonic Folland Gnat, smallest fighter in the world, managed to kill several F-86s without suffering losses.

Immediately after the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, claims were made than 1/3 of Israeli 251 air-to-air kills were due to Sparrow, and that Sparrow achieved Pk of 50%. As it turned out by 1978, only 12 Sparrows were fired, achieving either none or a single kill, with majority of Israeli pilots refusing to carry Sparrow at all. Only 4 of these firings were made from beyond visual range, and a single kill made might have been from beyond average visual range (5 nm) despite the fact that Israel does not claim it as a BVR kill. As many large fighters are visible well beyond 5 nm (up to 15 nm if engine smokes heavily) it is possible that kill in question was a visual-range one. Out of remaining kills, 2/3 were made with IR missiles and 1/3 with guns, according to statistics avaliable; Israelis however credited 2/3 of their air-to-air kills in both wars to guns or to guns aided by initial missile launch. Syrian pilots hated MiG-23 and considered it a worse fighter than MiG-21. Israeli general Hod stated that in 1973 war radar was “essentially useless” and that only one or no kills were made by radar-guided missiles.

In Bekaa Valley in 1982, 8 kills were with guns, 54 with IR missiles and 12 with radar-guided missiles; more than half of kills were made by “multirole” F-16 despite it being primarly tasked with bombing missions. All radar-guided missile kills except one were from visual range. Total of 5 BVR shots were made, making data range very low. It is known however that Syrian pilots were rather incompetent, with Israel winning 73-0 victory. After the war, Israeli General Mordecai Hod had stated that. had Israelis swapped planes with the enemy, outcome would have been the same.

In Falklands war, British have achieved 19 kills in 26 launches, for a Pk of 73%. Harriers themselves saw little fighting after first day, and almost all kills were against bomb-loaded aircraft. Further, Harriers used only IR missiles, majority of which were fired from rear hemisphere, thus achieving surprise. Argentine pilots did not try to outmaneuver missiles – even when they did notice they were being fired at, they used Vietnam war tactics which did not work with all-aspect missiles used by Harriers. At the same time, all Argentine radar-guided BVR Matra missiles missed.

During entire Cold War, only 3 or 4 air-to-air kills were made from beyond visual range out of 60 – 61 shots made at beyond visual range, for Pk of 5 – 6,6 %. All BVR kills were carefully staged outside combat.

Combat results from 1991 and 2003 invasions of Iraq and 1999 war in Yugoslavia are used to prove that AIM-120 can achieve BVR dominance. Yet these are misleading even if actual statistics are true.

Serbian MiG-29s were suffering from lack of spares since 1996, and resources were spent on riot police instead of maintaining aircraft; their pilots were flying 20 hours annually. To put this into perspective, US pilots even at worst of times flew more than 10 hours per month. Systems on MiG-29s were malfunctioning; on most aircraft, neither radar nor RWR functioned. Despite that, some pilots managed to evade several BVR missiles. One MiG-29 shootdown attributed to AIM-120 could also be a case of Serbian SAM engaging in fratricide; that would make it 5 kills in 13 launches, a Pk of 0,38.

As for Iraq, situation was similar with its air force in both wars, with pilots usually failling to take any evasive action once radar lock occured. Thus it is logical that USAF success rate would be similar, and it was. In Desert Storm, 41 USAF aerial victories were achieved with anywhere between 5 and 16 kills made at beyond visual range. 2 kills were made with guns, 10 with IR missiles and 24 with radar-guided missiles. 88 AIM-7 shots were made, giving a Pk of 0,27. Out of 24 AIM-7 kills, at least 9 were from visual range. For F-15Cs, 12 AIM-9 launches resulted in 8 kills (Pk 0,67), and 67 AIM-7 launches resulted in 23 kills (Pk 0,34). It should be noted that F-16s made 36 AIM-9 launches, of which at least 20 were accidental due to poor control stick ergonomy, and made 0 kills. US Navy F-14s and F-18s fired 21 AIM-7s for one kill, and 38 AIM-9s for two kills.

Between Desert Storm and Allied Force, USAF achieved 3 kills with AIM-9 and 3 with AIM-7, with at least one AIM-7 kills being visual range. Further, on Jaunary 5th 1999, two MiG-25s (equipped with radars for a change, which they used to illuminate US fighters) violated southern “no-fly” zone, and succeeded at evading 3 AIM-7, 1 AIM-120 and 2 AIM-54 missiles, all fired by US fighters from beyond visual range.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomcat84

quote:

ORIGINAL: DismalPseudoscience

and because the later block variants from 2020 or so don't access the 6-AMRAAM internal payload they are supposedly getting, which substantially constrains their air-to-air capabilities. I understand omitting DIRCM, since that is pretty speculative though planned, but the AMRAAM payload increase is pretty firmly laid out and doesn't involve speculating about the capabilities of new and rumored systems.

The database is fantastically expansive, so the occasional weird omission or error has to be expected. But I have asked about one such anomaly (or so it seems to me) and found it was deliberate before - there is usually a reason.

Next patch will feature a new DB that includes 2024 F-35A and C versions with 6 x internal AIM-120D
(Is the B model also supposed to get it?)