F-35 racked up a 28:1 kill ratio at recent Red Flag exercises

[WarKa DaNG]

Lolllzzz

 

[Esgalduin]

Didnt America say f35 was rubbish and f16 were outdoing it in combat. Didnt they say war on terror is won and war in Iraq was won. This is psychological war and everyone believes it here. It probably does has a good kill ratio but not as much as they make out

Well, they certainly didn't call the F35 'rubbish', more of a strain on the American economy with a string of complicated problems owing to the ambitious aims that characterised the creation of this jet. The F16 v F35 dogfight instance does indeed demonstrate that in terms of maneuverability the F16 takes the lead over the F35, and also emerges superior in the dogfight category. However, the F35 is a stealth fighter whose entire purpose is to achieve kills BVR, and evade radar detection while doing so. The F35 is not a knight, it is a ninja; its whole configuration rests on the idea that you can't kill what you can't see, which means that while it may not be good at dogfighting, its ostensibly superior stealth design will allow it to engage targets before they even become aware of it.

 

[Haroon Baloch]

Didnt America say f35 was rubbish and f16 were outdoing it in combat. Didnt they say war on terror is won and war in Iraq was won. This is psychological war and everyone believes it here. It probably does has a good kill ratio but not as much as they make out

The F16 comparison was done in the dog fight. F35 is not built for close combat. The F35 is built to stay stealth and kill the enemy with BVR missile. The enemy wont even know what hit em.

 

[Trango Towers]

The F16 comparison was done in the dog fight. F35 is not built for close combat. The F35 is built stay stealth and kill the enemy with BVR missile. The enemy wont even know what hit em.

Yes nice marketing. Enemy wong know. The enemy isnt sleeping. Not everyone fights the whiteman with spears

 

[LeGenD]

Yes nice marketing. Enemy wong know. The enemy isnt sleeping. Not everyone fights the whiteman with spears

Watch and learn.

Physics and mathematics of VLO design philosophy, and resultant effectiveness.

Also: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-3...hows-stunt-turns-older-jets-cant-touch-2019-1

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

Clear enough?

Now, I shall tell you another thing about F-35; its EODAS capability which provide 360 degree imaging and target acquisition coverage of potential threats to the pilot. This is huge because you cannot surprise F-35 even in WVR situations. F-35 pilot would be alert to angle of approach of the hostile aircraft from any direction and just need to press the button.

A large number of people are in for a rude awakening. F-35 can easily defeat any bird not named F-22A Raptor, and this situation will remain for indefinite period. These aircraft are built from scratch to contend with potential threats decades ahead from the norm at present - unprecedented amount of research and threat assessments inform development of these birds in short. Don't be naive.

 

[Trango Towers]

Watch and learn.

Physics and mathematics of VLO design philosophy, and resultant effectiveness.

Also: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-3...hows-stunt-turns-older-jets-cant-touch-2019-1

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

Clear enough?

Now, I shall tell you another thing about F-35; its EODAS capability which provide 360 degree imaging and target acquisition coverage of potential threats to the pilot. This is huge because you cannot surprise F-35 even in WVR situations. F-35 pilot would be alert to angle of approach of the hostile aircraft from any direction and just need to press the button.

A large number of people are in for a rude awakening. F-35 can easily defeat any bird not named F-22A Raptor, and this situation will remain for indefinite period. These aircraft are built from scratch to contend with potential threats decades ahead from the norm at present - unprecedented amount of research and threat assessments inform development of these birds in short. Don't be naive.

Oh dear.
Now use your brain...will they ever tell u anything negative. They will make u believe it's so good that you dont dare to fight them. So please jog on. India also had the best airforce in our neighbourhood until Feb 27

 

[gambit]

Which is why I label it a mediocre fighter. And as airforces wisen up to these tactics, airforces such as Russia and China, it will be one expensive paper weight.

Will be? You wish.

We do not have history of producing 'paper weights'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959

If you take a look thru history, starting with the source above, you will see that essentially, the 1950s explosion of fighters was a time of experimentation. Many of them have limited operational deployment life, but the ones that have longevity, like the F-4 and the F-104, why so? See if you can figure that out.

But if we continue to the later decades, we will see a pattern that of diminishing quantity of designs and most of them ended up with long operational deployment life. Even my first assignment the F-111 that was ridiculed and initially hated ended up a feared weapon by the entire Warsaw Pact and it had no equal from the same.

So no, the F-35 will not be that dream you have of being a 'paper weight'.

You try hard to dismiss criticism as petty.

I do not have to 'try hard'. I have history on my side. See above.

I will be blunt. Your Pakistan came around the same time we started experimenting with the jet age, so essentially, YOU are in no position to criticize US. An aircraft is a national project in that it requires the resources that only nation-states can provide, a higher level of education, established manufacturing base, continuous scientific foundations and achievements, and last but not least -- lots of money. Anyone from any country that do not match US in those regards and if his/her country do not contribute to aviation in general, let alone military aviation in specific -- STFU. The B-52 is just as old as your Pakistan, and it is still flying, so you are in no position to rant about drag coefficiency and assorted reasons why the F-35 is a 'bad' aircraft. Am not being mean, just as blunt as you are wishful.

The F16 v F35 dogfight instance does indeed demonstrate that in terms of maneuverability the F16 takes the lead over the F35, and also emerges superior in the dogfight category.

I tried in vain to explain that a clean F-16 is a useless F-16. Never mind the cannon. I was on the F-16 for five yrs. I know what 9g feels like, but I also know that in full combat load, even just for air-air, that 9g is not always available. So if I see a clean F-16, I know it is not a threat to me, no matter how agile it maybe over me.

I cannot say that to the F-22 and F-35. Both jets are designed to produce 9g regardless of load. People either cannot understand or worse REFUSE to understand the significance of the enclosed weapons aspect of these jets. They think that enclosing the weapons is ONLY for 'stealth'. They are wrong. The F-35 have no wing stresses in terms of centrifugal force from stuff hanging under the wings. That is why its maneuverability are minimally impacted by weapons load.

So if I see a clean F-22 or F-35, there is no telling its combat threat status, whether it is to me or to a ground location I am tasked to protect. Visually speaking, a clean F-22 or F-35 is ALWAYS a threat until established otherwise, like me seeing empty weapons bays, which is not likely.

People criticize the F-35 out of their emotions, not of their intellect because the latter would force them to concede that the rest of the world's air forces are done. There is no 'long wavelengths', no SPECTRA, and no Kolchuga can go against it. Quantum radar? Try another 20 yrs before deployment but by then, we WILL have something to counter that.

It is over.

 

[nahtanbob]

Will be? You wish.

We do not have history of producing 'paper weights'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959

If you take a look thru history, starting with the source above, you will see that essentially, the 1950s explosion of fighters was a time of experimentation. Many of them have limited operational deployment life, but the ones that have longevity, like the F-4 and the F-104, why so? See if you can figure that out.

But if we continue to the later decades, we will see a pattern that of diminishing quantity of designs and most of them ended up with long operational deployment life. Even my first assignment the F-111 that was ridiculed and initially hated ended up a feared weapon by the entire Warsaw Pact and it had no equal from the same.

So no, the F-35 will not be that dream you have of being a 'paper weight'.


I do not have to 'try hard'. I have history on my side. See above.

I will be blunt. Your Pakistan came around the same time we started experimenting with the jet age, so essentially, YOU are in no position to criticize US. An aircraft is a national project in that it requires the resources that only nation-states can provide, a higher level of education, established manufacturing base, continuous scientific foundations and achievements, and last but not least -- lots of money. Anyone from any country that do not match US in those regards and if his/her country do not contribute to aviation in general, let alone military aviation in specific -- STFU. The B-52 is just as old as your Pakistan, and it is still flying, so you are in no position to rant about drag coefficiency and assorted reasons why the F-35 is a 'bad' aircraft. Am not being mean, just as blunt as you are wishful.


I tried in vain to explain that a clean F-16 is a useless F-16. Never mind the cannon. I was on the F-16 for five yrs. I know what 9g feels like, but I also know that in full combat load, even just for air-air, that 9g is not always available. So if I see a clean F-16, I know it is not a threat to me, no matter how agile it maybe over me.

I cannot say that to the F-22 and F-35. Both jets are designed to produce 9g regardless of load. People either cannot understand or worse REFUSE to understand the significance of the enclosed weapons aspect of these jets. They think that enclosing the weapons is ONLY for 'stealth'. They are wrong. The F-35 have no wing stresses in terms of centripetal force from stuff hanging under the wings. That is why its maneuverability are minimally impacted by weapons load.

So if I see a clean F-22 or F-35, there is no telling its combat threat status, whether it is to me or to a ground location I am tasked to protect. Visually speaking, a clean F-22 or F-35 is ALWAYS a threat until established otherwise, like me seeing empty weapons bays, which is not likely.

People criticize the F-35 out of their emotions, not of their intellect because the latter would force them to concede that the rest of the world's air forces are done. There is no 'long wavelengths', no SPECTRA, and no Kolchuga can go against it. Quantum radar? Try another 20 yrs before deployment but by then, we WILL have something to counter that.

It is over.

I do not know what the F-35 can do. I am not going to war against USAF thinking it is a piece of junk.

Do you think others do?
As for Russian jets not performing in Desert Storm, we all know the level of pilots flying them, however do you believe the results would be similar if a professional air force were flying the same jets against yours?

The Iraqi air force was competent force. they are outclassed on technology

 

[The SC]

It does not matter how many countries against one. In air combat, it is still one-to-one. See if you can figure that one out.

Sorry to contradict you.. but 100 fighters against 50 is quite different from 500 against 50..that is not one-to-one in either case.. but might be less relevant if the 50 are stealth and the others are not..

*I want to call the F-35 "Batman".. but I reserve that name to the F-22..

 

[zectech]

How did they do against SAMs? These stealth jets are for defense and for no competition from active SAMs. Once a S-300 or S-400 enters the war, they are falling from the skies. Making them for defense only or for an already defeated ADS from supersaturated cruise missile attacks.

 

[Fledgingwings]

F35 is a unique and potent plateform.the americans didnt put all the payolaaaa into it for no reason.specially when it comes to a joint project of several countries like Israel and UK.this bird can and will hit !

 

[gambit]

I do not know what the F-35 can do. I am not going to war against USAF thinking it is a piece of junk.

F-35 haters, on PDF and elsewhere, want OTHERS to go to war against the USAF believing the F-35 is a piece of junk.

OTHERS -- let that sink in.

 

[CriticalThought]

Will be? You wish.

We do not have history of producing 'paper weights'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_fighter_aircraft_1950–1959

If you take a look thru history, starting with the source above, you will see that essentially, the 1950s explosion of fighters was a time of experimentation. Many of them have limited operational deployment life, but the ones that have longevity, like the F-4 and the F-104, why so? See if you can figure that out.

But if we continue to the later decades, we will see a pattern that of diminishing quantity of designs and most of them ended up with long operational deployment life. Even my first assignment the F-111 that was ridiculed and initially hated ended up a feared weapon by the entire Warsaw Pact and it had no equal from the same.

So no, the F-35 will not be that dream you have of being a 'paper weight'.


I do not have to 'try hard'. I have history on my side. See above.

I will be blunt. Your Pakistan came around the same time we started experimenting with the jet age, so essentially, YOU are in no position to criticize US. An aircraft is a national project in that it requires the resources that only nation-states can provide, a higher level of education, established manufacturing base, continuous scientific foundations and achievements, and last but not least -- lots of money. Anyone from any country that do not match US in those regards and if his/her country do not contribute to aviation in general, let alone military aviation in specific -- STFU. The B-52 is just as old as your Pakistan, and it is still flying, so you are in no position to rant about drag coefficiency and assorted reasons why the F-35 is a 'bad' aircraft. Am not being mean, just as blunt as you are wishful.


I tried in vain to explain that a clean F-16 is a useless F-16. Never mind the cannon. I was on the F-16 for five yrs. I know what 9g feels like, but I also know that in full combat load, even just for air-air, that 9g is not always available. So if I see a clean F-16, I know it is not a threat to me, no matter how agile it maybe over me.

I cannot say that to the F-22 and F-35. Both jets are designed to produce 9g regardless of load. People either cannot understand or worse REFUSE to understand the significance of the enclosed weapons aspect of these jets. They think that enclosing the weapons is ONLY for 'stealth'. They are wrong. The F-35 have no wing stresses in terms of centrifugal force from stuff hanging under the wings. That is why its maneuverability are minimally impacted by weapons load.

So if I see a clean F-22 or F-35, there is no telling its combat threat status, whether it is to me or to a ground location I am tasked to protect. Visually speaking, a clean F-22 or F-35 is ALWAYS a threat until established otherwise, like me seeing empty weapons bays, which is not likely.

People criticize the F-35 out of their emotions, not of their intellect because the latter would force them to concede that the rest of the world's air forces are done. There is no 'long wavelengths', no SPECTRA, and no Kolchuga can go against it. Quantum radar? Try another 20 yrs before deployment but by then, we WILL have something to counter that.

It is over.

To continue the history lesson, the F-35 is just the basis for the future. Its design aim was to be a mass produced second tier companion to the F-22. It is never going to exceed its design aims.

This base platform for the future lays the foundation for overcoming diminishing returns through computation. In doing so, it has already solved huge technological problems. An engine capable of VTOL, sensor fusion and display through HMDS, along with a basic stealth design. Just one of those technologies would take a state decades to master. But here is the thing. The result of all those technologies still doesn't give air superiority today. It can't when air superiority wasn't even the design aim. Everybody understands how procurement works in the American military industrial complex. Everyone understands the politicians making decisions are clueless and need numbers like 28:1 to sway their opinion. To the outsider it may look like F-35 is the plan. It's not. Some years later, they will again be presenting numbers like 28:1 to get more funding for something else.

Now it is a shame that you spent an entire paragraph attacking my country of origin. It made you feel good, and it made you look dumb. Thank you.

The internal load may give it benefit in a roll but did it lead to a 400 degree per second roll rate? I am using hyperbole here to make the point that it is not a WVR fighter. It made trade offs and balanced various requirements but this did not produce the world's best dog fighter.

So how does it stand in a stealth scenario? By your own admission, you don't fight yourself, you fight fourth gen fighters. You are going into battle with a low opinion of your enemy and with over confidence. Sorry thought operational testing would reveal its problems. He never realized the military industrial complex may have deep roots that will ignore short term defects for long term plans. The USAF certainly has a plan. Meanwhile it's going around the neighborhood bullying kids with shiny toys.

 

[Ultima Thule]

To continue the history lesson, the F-35 is just the basis for the future. Its design aim was to be a mass produced second tier companion to the F-22. It is never going to exceed its design aims.

This base platform for the future lays the foundation for overcoming diminishing returns through computation. In doing so, it has already solved huge technological problems. An engine capable of VTOL, sensor fusion and display through HMDS, along with a basic stealth design. Just one of those technologies would take a state decades to master. But here is the thing. The result of all those technologies still doesn't give air superiority today. It can't when air superiority wasn't even the design aim. Everybody understands how procurement works in the American military industrial complex. Everyone understands the politicians making decisions are clueless and need numbers like 28:1 to sway their opinion. To the outsider it may look like F-35 is the plan. It's not. Some years later, they will again be presenting numbers like 28:1 to get more funding for something else.

Now it is a shame that you spent an entire paragraph attacking my country of origin. It made you feel good, and it made you look dumb. Thank you.

The internal load may give it benefit in a roll but did it lead to a 400 degree per second roll rate? I am using hyperbole here to make the point that it is not a WVR fighter. It made trade offs and balanced various requirements but this did not produce the world's best dog fighter.

So how does it stand in a stealth scenario? By your own admission, you don't fight yourself, you fight fourth gen fighters. You are going into battle with a low opinion of your enemy and with over confidence. Sorry thought operational testing would reveal its problems. He never realized the military industrial complex may have deep roots that will ignore short term defects for long term plans. The USAF certainly has a plan. Meanwhile it's going around the neighborhood bullying kids with shiny toys.

Future war will be fought in BVR arena, at least for superpower, that's stealth tech for @CriticalThought

 

[gambit]

To continue the history lesson, the F-35 is just the basis for the future. Its design aim was to be a mass produced second tier companion to the F-22. It is never going to exceed its design aims.

Regarding the highlighted -- so what?

When I gave you the wiki link about the 1950s fighters, did you exercise your forum name? Looks like not. All fighters set the stages for the next generation. No exceptions, not even the F-22 and F-35. So how is this a criticism?

But here is the thing. The result of all those technologies still doesn't give air superiority today. It can't when air superiority wasn't even the design aim.

Do you not see how you contradict your own criticism? The F-35 was not intended to be a dedicated air fighter, therefore, it is a bad air fighter. That made no sense as a criticism. The 747 was not designed as a fighter, therefore, it is a bad fighter.

Everybody understands how procurement works in the American military industrial complex.

Ah, yes, the old MIC standby as a distraction for one's own inadequate argument. Every country that must have a defense, even the ones that must import their defense, have a MIC. Nothing original here, folks.

Now it is a shame that you spent an entire paragraph attacking my country of origin. It made you feel good, and it made you look dumb. Thank you.

No, the real shame here is you trying -- in vain -- to criticize something you know nothing about.

The internal load may give it benefit in a roll but did it lead to a 400 degree per second roll rate? I am using hyperbole here to make the point that it is not a WVR fighter. It made trade offs and balanced various requirements but this did not produce the world's best dog fighter.

There is a maneuver call the 'Dojo Drift'. Kinda like the 'Pulgachev Cobra'. Named after their respective pilots who executed the maneuvers.

In the 'Dojo Drift', Capt. Andrew “Dojo” Olson execute a 50 alpha pitch up, then an aggressive 135 deg change of direction into a CONTROLLED flat spin. Any pilot -- and am assuming you are not in that group -- knows that a flat spin is very much a killer of pilots. I learned how to fly while in high school and have received flat spin recovery training before I joined the USAF. But here we have an aircraft that works with the pilot to perform a dangerous maneuver that eventually all F-35 pilots will know how to do. Tactically speaking, the Drift is a more useful maneuver than the Cobra because the Drift is a loop while the Cobra is a stall. Both maneuvers loses energy but the Drift loses far less precisely because the maneuver is executed inside a loop.

The entire scene was captured here...

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/...f-35-pilot-pull-off-some-death-defying-moves/

We can hear the spectators' expression of disbelief because they know what a flat spin can do -- kill. What I see are flight controls laws programming that are in a league by itself.

The F-35 is not the world's best dogfighter? By whose standards? The Russians? The Chinese? The French? Your Pakistan's?

Please...

So how does it stand in a stealth scenario? By your own admission, you don't fight yourself, you fight fourth gen fighters.

Not our fault the rest of the world do not have a peer. Too bad the Soviets ignored Ufimtsev to their detriment.

You are going into battle with a low opinion of your enemy and with over confidence.

That is your assumption of US. More to satisfy your own emotional needs than any accurate descriptor about US.

Sorry thought operational testing would reveal its problems.

And we will fix them. Just like we did in the past for other platforms. This is a useless criticism in light of history.