F-16, F-15, F-35 (range, stamina, turning, and acceleration )

[Signalian]

An analysis of range, stamina, turning, and acceleration
​

The Contenders:

There are currently slated to be three USAF strike aircraft in the 2020 timeframe

1. F-15E Strike Eagle
• One of the largest and heaviest fighter aircraft
• Massive fuel/weapons capacity

2. F-16C Fighting Falcon
• One of the smallest and lightest fighter aircraft
• Diminutive fuel capacity, but retains over half the weapons capacity of the F-15E

3. F-35A Lightning II
• External dimensions similar to F-16, but weight similar to F-15C
• Tremendous internal fuel/weapon capacity for it’s size

– Will also look at F-16C with conformal fuel tanks (referenced as F-16I)


F-15E (SPECIFICATIONS)

• Empty Weight: 38,700 lbs
• Box volume (LxWxH): 50,517 cubic feet
• Fuel

– Internal: 22,300 lbs

– External: 12,000 lbs
• 3 X 600gallon tanks on heavy A2G stations

• A2A

• AIM-120 up to 8
– One each on four conformal heavy stations
– One each on four dedicated AAM stations

• AIM-9 up to 4
– One each on four dedicated AAM stations

• A2G
– Up to 7 heavy stations
– One under each wing
– One on centerline
– Four conformal to the lower fuselage

• Targeting Pods - External


F-16C (I) (SPECIFICATIONS)

• Empty Weight: 20,300 lbs (22,300 lbs)
• Box volume (LxWxH): 25,898 cubic feet
• Fuel

– Internal: 7,000 lbs (10,200 lbs)

– External: 7,000 lbs
• 2 X 370gallon tanks on heavy A2G stations
• 1 X 300gallon tank on centerline station

• A2A

• AIM-120 up to 6
– One each on two heavy stations
– One each on four dedicated AAM stations

• AIM-9 up to 6
– One each on two heavy stations
– One each on four dedicated AAM stations

• A2G
– Up to 4 heavy stations

• Targeting Pods – External


F-35A (SPECIFICATIONS)

• Empty Weight: 29,400 lbs
• Box volume (LxWxH): 25,546 cubic feet

• Fuel
– Internal: 18,200 lbs
– External: 5,800 lbs
• 2 – 426gallon tanks on heavy A2G stations

• A2A – AIM-120 up to 14
• Internal
– 6 – Two each per heavy station
– One each on dedicated AAM station
• External – 8
– two each per heavy station

• AIM-9 up to 10
– Two each per external heavy station
– One each on dedicated AAM station

• A2G
– Up to 6 heavy stations
– Two internal
– Four external

• Targeting Pods - internal

Conclusion of Specs

• The considerable empty weight of the dimensionally small F-35 is accounted for by it’s internal carriage of large fuel volumes, two heavy A2G stations, two A2A stations, and Targeting equipment

• Despite the F-35 only having 4 dedicated AAM stations, the ability to carry two missiles per heavy station gives it vast flexibility

Missions

500nm Endurance

• If tanks are carried then they are assumed to be carried throughout mission

• Assumed time/performance critical target appears as soon as aircraft is on station (most fuel remaining, worst performance)
– Tanks are dropped
– Instant/Sustained turn taken at cruise speed
– .8M to 1.2M acceleration measured

Additional factors

• Max Range calculated as alternate mission plan

• Two flight profiles calculated
– Optimum max range profile
– Mission dictated 20,000ft at 0.8M

DRAG
(drag areas estimated from Max Endurance )

F-15E
Base Drag Area: 21.71

• Mission based

• AA – 23.33
• AA with tanks – 25.00
• AG – 24.54
• AG with tanks – 26.52

F-16C (I)

Base Drag Area: 9.07 (9.21)

• Mission based

• AA – 10.57 (10.71)
• AA with tanks – 12.94 (13.08)
• AG – 13.30 (13.44)
• AG with tanks – 16.42 (16.56)

F-35

Base Drag Area: 9.75

• Mission based

• AA – 9.75
• AA with tanks – 12.42
• AG – 9.75
• AG with tanks – 12.42

Drag – conclusion

• Despite the natural low drag of the F-16 airframe the addition of missiles, bombs, pylons, tanks, and targeting pods nearly doubles it’s base drag.

• The low drag of the F-35 will allow for higher cruise speeds and/or greater range, the two being a natural tradeoff.

• The drag areas of the clean F-16 and F-35 are consistent with the story of an F-35 with 9 tons of internal fuel/weapons (traditional T/W of .59) out climbing the F-16 chase plane that was carrying only a centerline gas tank (traditional T/W of .61) while in military power.

 

[Signalian]

Conclusions

• We see that under actual combat conditions the F-35 can climb, run, and turn as well as or better than it’s stable mates. It does this while having a better ECM/EA suite, full IR targeting and spherical tracking, secure LPI networking, and all aspect X-Band VLO. In short it is more capable than anything that has ever been used in combat before

• Optimum Profile was done to show how “Max Range” mission data could be gathered as these represent leaving a tanker and returning to a tanker with reserves based on aircraft weight, a true best case scenario.

• Constrained Profile was done to show how mission planners and battlespace managers may not want aircraft going across so many altitudes, and max range at 20kft was at much lower speeds than the 0.8M calculated but the mission planners also can’t afford to simply wait around

• When looking at the F-35s clean range at altitudes above 30kft it is easy to see how the last 75nm in and out could be done as 1.25M and still make a 500nm+ range, which falls in line with the statement “150nm of cruise at 1.25M”. I may do a case study on this in the future.