Revealed: Don’t Buy a Fighter Jet for Its Speed

[wiseone2]

Hi,

A lot of poster are concerned about the speed of the JF 17---and I amongst a few others have stated many a times---that SPEED IS FOR VANITY---SENSORS AND WEAPONS ARE FOR SANITY

So---enjoy the article---click on the thread to read the complete article.

Revealed: Don’t Buy a Fighter Jet for Its Speed | The National Interest

A new report details what aircraft features will be the most valuble in the dogfights of the future.

Michael Peck
December 22, 2015


What can be seen can be destroyed, is an old battlefield proverb. And in the dogfight of the future, victory will go not to the swiftest jet, but the one with the best sensors.

That's where air combat is headed, according to a new study by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. And if that forecast is correct, then this is good news for the beleaguered F-35, which has been criticized for mediocre flying performance, but whose stealth and sensors may allow it to ambush Chinese and Russian aircraft.

If an aircraft can fly at Mach 5 it has an edge over an aircraft flying at Mach 2. I know there isn't any aircraft flying at Mach 5. The title should be rewritten - Do not buy a fighter jet for marginal improvement in speed

 

[abdulbarijan]

If an aircraft can fly at Mach 5 it has an edge over an aircraft flying at Mach 2. I know there isn't any aircraft flying at Mach 5. The title should be rewritten - Do not buy a fighter jet for marginal improvement in speed

Soooo... whats your argument again ?? ... I mean knowing the fact that most combat aircrafts operate in the 1.6-2.0+ Mach range ... what's the point of pointing out such an extreme value such as Mach 5 knowing fully well that there is no "combat platform" that can achieve that (as of yet atleast) ...

therefore, if speed becomes a focal point there is not much discussion to have there, as the difference is quite less ... it would have made sense back in the day where you had subsonic aircrafts ... but not today .... but even then, I remember star fighters holding quite a few records regarding speed and all ... yet in 1965 ... It was the Sabers that made the difference not the star fighters ... although we might've used them to send a couple "sound breaking" messages a day or two before the war ... but that is a different story for a different discussion ...

 

[nangyale]

I think the focus should be more on acceleration than the final Mach rating.

As they say in the vehicle industry 0-60 in xx secs @MastanKhan.

 

[MastanKhan]

If an aircraft can fly at Mach 5 it has an edge over an aircraft flying at Mach 2. I know there isn't any aircraft flying at Mach 5. The title should be rewritten - Do not buy a fighter jet for marginal improvement in speed

Hi,

It don't have no edge---because a mach 6-7 missile would take it out---as it won't be able to maneouver----.

Have you heard of an aircraft SR71---the one that could fly at 2500 MPH---why it is grounded in the 90's----because it cannot out run the missiles anymore---, So when the new faster high altitude missiles came out----it got put into the pasture.

How do you know there is nothing flying at mach 5---actually it flies higher than mach 5---called the Aurora.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

you know the saying turn and burn. speed can get you out of a jam.

U.S still needs a Mig-31 class fighter
U.S really need a replacement for the F-111 Aardvark

to think the F-35 will be a jack of all trades fighter is silly.

you can't supplement speed and range for just better sensors.

UNfair comparison
for first F22 will serve as interceptor / air superiority
second one is a bomber and B-1 Lancer is taking care of that.
F35 is filling the role of f-16/ hornets and A-10s

 

[satishkumarcsc]

Well wish the topic changed from 'speed' to energy management and acceleration.