What's new

First F-16 Now Even Russian Su-27 Fighter Aircraft Can Destroy Three New US F-35s At Once

NKVD

BANNED
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
5,157
Reaction score
-18
Country
India
Location
Russian Federation
Currently, the US Department of Defense (DOD) is reviewing the total number of F35s it will purchase. According to a report released by the National Security Network, the DOD plans to purchase and operate nearly 2, 500 aircrafts costing US around $1.4 trillion.

In light of that, analyst Bill French wrote a report titled “Thunder without lightning: high cost and limited benefit development program of F-35,” reviewing the new aircraft.

The document states that according to the technical parameters the F-35 is “losing to the fourth-generation fighter MiG-29 and Su-27, developed by the Russian Air Force and used around the world.”



1022114737.jpg

© FLICKR/ US AIR FORCE
F-35 Jet, New Destroyer Evaluation Disputes Cost US Hundreds of Millions
The Soviet MiG-29 and Su-27 fighter aircraft are superior in technical performance than the new US fighter aircraft F-35. The conclusion was reached by the American analyst Bill French, working for a non-profit organization National Security Network.


“The F-35 is significantly inferior to the Russian Su-27 and MiG-29 in regard to wing loading (exception — F35C), acceleration and thrust-weight ratio (the ratio of thrust to weight of the aircraft),” said the analyst.

Besides, all of the F-35s have significantly lower maximum speed as compared to the Soviet Union aircrafts.

Mr. French also deliberated that in a simulation of air combat, the results draw even “grimmer picture.”

According to him, in 2009 the analysts of US Air Force Intelligence and the Lockheed Martin Company, which developed the new American fighter, noted that despite the superiority of the F-35 in regard to stealth technology and avionics, if compared to the Su-27 and MiG —29 the loss ratio is to be expected 3: 1. That is, for each destroyed Su-27 or MiG-29 there would be three F-35 destroyed.

Also, in a real educational dogfight, a veteran in a US Air Force F-16 easily won over the F-35.

The latter clearly did not have enough maneuverability — the aircraft never managed to take a position for launching missiles or firing a gun, while the F-16 managed to catch opponent in sight at least 10 times.

Earlier the problems associated with the F-35 were also noticed in Australia. News.com.au compared the F- 35 to the latest fifth-generation T-50 fighter. The portal noted, judging by the videos, the Russian aircraft significantly exceeds US maneuverability.

Read more: Russian Su-27 Fighter Aircraft Can Destroy Three New US F-35s / Sputnik International
 
. .
this is pretty funny.

can someone explain how a Mig 29 and Su-27 would kill a F-35 to a ratio of 3 to 1??


RCS OF Different Fighters


going by RCS from this post

the F-35 RCS would be the size of a golf ball to a tennis ball, while the Mig-29 is 5m2 and Su-27 is 10 to 15m2

then you have the F-35 which has a very advance AESA radar in the APG-81

maybe someone could do the math of who would see who first in a head on engagment comparing RCS and Radar power.


and I'm sure the article doesn't into account AWACS like E-2D which I think is the most powerful and game changing in the world.

E-2D-Advanced-Hawkeye.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
Seems like highly doubtful article. No details and facts to validatr its claims.
 
.
F-35 cannot survive a dogfight everyone knows that, it's too heavy, but that heaviness bring with it some great radar. SO as long as it's armed it's effective. F-22 would probably fare better in dogfights
 
.
F-35 is suppose to get its enemy in stealth mode but if news about its inferiority with regards to parameters like wing loading, acceleration and thrust-weight ratio and having significantly lower maximum speeds wrt few Russian fighters is right then whats left in the thing called stealth? They shud have made a heavy stealth platform with n number of weapons rather than creating a so called stealth fighter who can not fight. But again i really doubt the case with F-35 should be so.It really doesnt make sense.
 
. . . .
Yeah right their fourth gen and 4++ gen can beat any fighter in the world and having experience in 5th gen for more then 25+ years and can't make plane to beat 4++ fighters. WOW good going and excellent logic.
hqdefault.jpg
 
.
Sputnik International :lol:

ye F-35 koi temple ka "ghanta" lagta hai sala koi bhai sake bajane ki Vaat Marta hai :D
Ha Ha Ha :P

In war they should keep F-16 in the front. F-22 in Middle and F-35 in last as last ditch effort :P
 
.
F-35 cannot survive a dogfight everyone knows that, it's too heavy,
Its Not WW2 that F-35 will get in Dogfight.And Even It Does How Can You shoot Down A Fighter which Has most Sophisticated 5 gen DRFMs & Jammers on-board. With Cannons I Guess:disagree:
 
Last edited:
.
We would especially like to thank David Axe, Winslow Wheeler, Mandy Smithberger, Pierre Sprey, Larry Korb, Kate Blakeley, and Bill Hartung for reviewing drafts of the paper and providing valuable feedback that immensely benefited this work.



They used everyone who hates F-35 as advisers. This "analysis" is most ridiculous thing I have read in long time... especially the part where they claim that F-35 has low range.

If F-35 is so bad why are Russians spreading anti-F35 propaganda so much? If it's bad then Russians would be saying how great it is but they aren't doing that...
 
.
Ha Ha Ha :P

In war they should keep F-16 in the front. F-22 in Middle and F-35 in last as last ditch effort :P
nope still 1 Superduper su-27 with ancient alian technology and 1 BVR missile can hunt down all 3 Aircrafts. :D

Its Not WW2 that F-35 will get in Dogfight.And Even It Does How Can You shoot Down A Fighter which Has most Sophisticated 5 gen DRFMs & Jammers on-board. With Cannons I Guess:disagree:
FlyingTanks2.jpg
 
.
Its Not WW2 that F-35 will get in Dogfight.And Even It Does How Can You shoot Down A Fighter which Has most Sophisticated 5 gen DRFMs & Jammers on-board. With Cannons I Guess:disagree:

Lol what? I said that as well you just cut that out when quoting me.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom