Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

[BMD]

Yes. The Rafale does have EODAS, has been operational since 2013. Although there are sensor coverage limitations due to the positioning of the sensors, but it's not a deal-breaker.

EODAS is simply MAWS + LWS. Although the F-35 started design phase with this tech right from the start and ended up in marketing brochures, but due to development delays most other aircraft have caught up. So today, pretty much all advanced aircraft post 2010 have this tech. Su-35S, Typhoon and Rafale are among them.

DDM-NG | Air Dominance, COUNTERMEASURES | MBDA

DDM-NG has been designed to provide the Rafale fighter self-protection system (Spectra) with an advanced Missile Warning System covering most of the sphere around the aircraft.

www.mbda-systems.com

The Su-35 practically matches the F-35 now.
View attachment 20049

Right now, the Su-57's EO sensors are the technology to beat, not the F-35.
View attachment 20050

We are yet to see what upgrade and coverage the Rafale F4.2 gets.

It has DDM-NG which Dassault claim can act like EODAS but their is no evidence of actually using it for an OTS shootdown and yes, it's far from 360deg, either as a more advanced A2A sensor or as a MAWS. The Rafale has 2 sensors trying to cover everything, EODAS has 6+1 (EOTS).

Su-57's sensors are better??? Based on what exactly? The F-35's system components have been upgraded very recently.

F-35′s X-Ray Vision System Is Getting An Upgrade, But Will It Actually Save Money?

Lockheed Martin and Raytheon say the update will improve the jet's capability and save money, but it could exacerbate existing sustainment issues.

www.thedrive.com

And don't forget that EOTS has TGP-like magnification too, which means it will whoop any DDM-NG/Su-57 system across it's region of coverage. The Su-57's systems are also clearly non-stealthy, like the plane as a whole.

 

[Innominate]

Yes. The Rafale does have EODAS, has been operational since 2013. Although there are sensor coverage limitations due to the positioning of the sensors, but it's not a deal-breaker.

EODAS is simply MAWS + LWS. Although the F-35 started design phase with this tech right from the start and ended up in marketing brochures, but due to development delays most other aircraft have caught up. So today, pretty much all advanced aircraft post 2010 have this tech. Su-35S, Typhoon and Rafale are among them.

DDM-NG | Air Dominance, COUNTERMEASURES | MBDA

DDM-NG has been designed to provide the Rafale fighter self-protection system (Spectra) with an advanced Missile Warning System covering most of the sphere around the aircraft.

www.mbda-systems.com

Negative. Your knowledge is lacking bigtime for you to think and claim Rafale has EODAS and that EODAS is just MAWS tells me you don't know what you're talking about. EODAS are actual cameras that sensor fuses it to the pilots helmet which Rafale lacks bigtime.

SU-35 has nothing similar to F-35 what you are showing are MAWS you need to educate yourself on the difference because you are absolutely wrong. There's a reason why Rafale loses every time it competes with F-35. If F-35 was offered to India during their fighter competition India would have hands down bought the F-35.

 

[randomradio]

The room for upgrade on the F-35 is much larger than the Rafale. 4.2 is the 52 of the F-16.

4.2 is the 30 of the F-16. It still has two more upgrades planned, F5 and F6. That's all the way to about 2050. And a final F7 is necessary as well.

Block 4 + a new engine would basically be a new plane.

That's really far away. Possibly between 2035 and 2040. And I doubt current jets will get this upgrade because it won't make sense. Especially so for the Swiss and Finnish, who will start working on a replacement by the 2050s.

Anyway, the only thing that's important to these two countries is what you are offering today and how capable and mature it will be when it is delivered. Plus a 15-20 year roadmap for a hardware refresh, ie, the F6. They are only looking at a 30-year life cycle.

The future imagined potential of the jets is only important to countries with large air forces since procurement itself spans decades and need a 40-year roadmap, which means roughly a 60-year life cycle for the whole fleet. F-16V, F7/8 etc.

 

[randomradio]

The F-35 can supercruise at M1.2 and is far more likely than the Rafale to be carrying a mission load with which it can supercruise due to internal bays.

It doesn't supercruise. They take the jet supersonic and then stop afterburners, then is slowly slows down, but maintains mach 1.2 as it slows down.

Rafale goes supersonic without afterburners, that's the difference. Also it can supercruise with 1 tank and 4 AAMs, a configuration suitable for interception, one of the most important reasons why supercruise is necessary.

LCCs are something that Dassault can fabricate.

Lol.

 

[randomradio]

It has DDM-NG which Dassault claim can act like EODAS but their is no evidence of actually using it for an OTS shootdown and yes, it's far from 360deg, either as a more advanced A2A sensor or as a MAWS. The Rafale has 2 sensors trying to cover everything, EODAS has 6+1 (EOTS).

You gotta remember you are comparing something half a decade before the F-35. And as I've pointed out the F4.2 configuration is still unknown.

Rafale can perform OTS, and unlike the F-35, the Rafale is actually operational with an OTS capable missile. Plus you forgot about the Rafale's FSO, so that's 2+2.

Su-57's sensors are better??? Based on what exactly?

UV+IR+CCD. It's accurate enough to be equipped with DIRCM as well.

The F-35's system components have been upgraded very recently.

F-35′s X-Ray Vision System Is Getting An Upgrade, But Will It Actually Save Money?

Lockheed Martin and Raytheon say the update will improve the jet's capability and save money, but it could exacerbate existing sustainment issues.

www.thedrive.com

Sure. I've mentioned it. Block 4.

And don't forget that EOTS has TGP-like magnification too, which means it will whoop any DDM-NG/Su-57 system across it's region of coverage. The Su-57's systems are also clearly non-stealthy, like the plane as a whole.

Ever heard of the concept called "zoom"? Have you ever seen helicopter police chase videos from the 90s? The zoom function has been a feature of electro-optical devices since the 60s.

 

[randomradio]

Negative. Your knowledge is lacking bigtime for you to think and claim Rafale has EODAS and that EODAS is just MAWS tells me you don't know what you're talking about. EODAS are actual cameras that sensor fuses it to the pilots helmet which Rafale lacks bigtime.

You've got the concept wrong. What you are talking about is the HMDS that displays data on a visor. The MAWS itself does pretty much the same as all other modern MAWS.

Also, when you say the Rafale lacks it, that's only in reference to the F3. The new F4 comes with a French HMDS. The aircraft in competition is the F4.

Check out the article, and the date it was published.

BAE's Striker helmet gives fighter pilots 'X-ray vision'

BAE Systems' most advanced helmet can see through solid walls, and enables the pilot to see the target and fire without turning the plane.

www.bbc.com

SU-35 has nothing similar to F-35 what you are showing are MAWS you need to educate yourself on the difference because you are absolutely wrong.

To a certain extent, yes. The Su-35's sensor design is older than the F-35's and doesn't have all the features. But it does the primary job of the F-35's EODAS, ie detecting missiles launches for self-protection and tracking other aircraft. But we have very little information about the Su-35's MAWS to make an accurate comparison.

Look, people are unnecessarily impressed by the F-35's EODAS, it's not as tactically useful as you think in a BVR fight compared to the MAWS of other aircraft. It's only useful when the fight comes really close to home, which is not a desirable place for the F-35 to be in. MAWS don't have a whole lot of range, it's just a smaller IRST.

The F-35's helmet is far more impressive than the EODAS itself.

This is the same company that made the F-35's helmet, and they have made a helmet for India's Rafale. Check out the video in it.

You are being redirected...

Basically whatever the aircraft can see is integrated with the helmet. The IAF uses DASH IV and TARGO II. The main difference is the F-35's helmet integrates a night vision device in the helmet which is displayed, while other helmets use NVGs. But they all carry the same display.

Most of these can be added in 5-year hardware refreshes.

In 2014, the F-35's original IOC date, the F-35's EODAS would have been very impressive. But in 2021, with all its current problems, it's become common technology. Now you are offering this tech all the way in 2024, while not knowing how much your competitors have progressed.

There's a reason why Rafale loses every time it competes with F-35. If F-35 was offered to India during their fighter competition India would have hands down bought the F-35.

Honestly, the F-35 would have failed to make the shortlist due to performance shortfalls. We need twin engine jets with high performance because of our operating environment. Anyway, it didn't exist at the time. So you are comparing the current F-35 to a Rafale and Typhoon that were a generation older.

The Rafale F4.2 will come with 360 deg GaN radars.

 

[randomradio]

Negative. Your knowledge is lacking bigtime for you to think and claim Rafale has EODAS and that EODAS is just MAWS tells me you don't know what you're talking about. EODAS are actual cameras that sensor fuses it to the pilots helmet which Rafale lacks bigtime.

SU-35 has nothing similar to F-35 what you are showing are MAWS you need to educate yourself on the difference because you are absolutely wrong. There's a reason why Rafale loses every time it competes with F-35. If F-35 was offered to India during their fighter competition India would have hands down bought the F-35.

Example of others catching up.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1408276535811792909

That little gizmo at the bottom left is pretty much the same thing that's on the F-35, a dual colour MAWS. Basically India has caught up with what's on the F-35 now. And it can be displayed on the HMDS too.

 

[Innominate]

Example of others catching up.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1408276535811792909

That little gizmo at the bottom left is pretty much the same thing that's on the F-35, a dual colour MAWS. Basically India has caught up with what's on the F-35 now. And it can be displayed on the HMDS too.

No. Have to be blunt.... You're either ignorant or lying because not even Dassault says its 360 MAWS are similar to F-35's EODAS.

 

[BMD]

You gotta remember you are comparing something half a decade before the F-35. And as I've pointed out the F4.2 configuration is still unknown.

Rafale can perform OTS, and unlike the F-35, the Rafale is actually operational with an OTS capable missile. Plus you forgot about the Rafale's FSO, so that's 2+2.



UV+IR+CCD. It's accurate enough to be equipped with DIRCM as well.



Sure. I've mentioned it. Block 4.



Ever heard of the concept called "zoom"? Have you ever seen helicopter police chase videos from the 90s? The zoom function has been a feature of electro-optical devices since the 60s.

FSO only counts as one, the TV camera part is worthless and it's nowhere near the magnification of EOTS. Can it perform OTS with DDM-NG though? Never been proven.

DIRCM is line of sight, which is not the same as targeting a missile. And you still haven't said why you think they're better. Resolution? Range? Sensor fusion? It may just be a MAWS.

So better gets better still.

But zoom capability is larger and better on TGPs than staring arrays or IRST-type systems. Simply enlarging one portion of a display is not the same thing due to resolution limitations.

Example of others catching up.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1408276535811792909

That little gizmo at the bottom left is pretty much the same thing that's on the F-35, a dual colour MAWS. Basically India has caught up with what's on the F-35 now. And it can be displayed on the HMDS too.

That's like saying that a spear is basically the same thing as a sniper rifle.

 

[BMD]

It doesn't supercruise. They take the jet supersonic and then stop afterburners, then is slowly slows down, but maintains mach 1.2 as it slows down.

Rafale goes supersonic without afterburners, that's the difference. Also it can supercruise with 1 tank and 4 AAMs, a configuration suitable for interception, one of the most important reasons why supercruise is necessary.



Lol.

No, they said it did M1.2 for 150 miles. Cruise implies constant speed, if the speed was falling, they didn't maintain M1.2. They never said anything about slowing down during that period. The reason for the 150 miles is probably because that was the mission they modelled.

No it can't. Supercruise was an area the Typhoon comfortably beat the Rafale on.

 

[randomradio]

No. Have to be blunt.... You're either ignorant or lying because not even Dassault says its 360 MAWS are similar to F-35's EODAS.

You've misunderstood. The current one doesn't match EODAS, it only has some of the features. But we are not talking about the current one since the Rafale F4.2 is undergoing a hardware refresh. Case in point, the Rafale's getting a 360 deg GaN radar, SDR and other types of new hardware which does not exist on the F-35. It's all next generation.

 

[randomradio]

FSO only counts as one, the TV camera part is worthless and it's nowhere near the magnification of EOTS. Can it perform OTS with DDM-NG though? Never been proven.

The CCD is excellent. The Indian version also comes with IRST. As for OTS, it's already been demonstrated, but they won't say how it was done. But the F4.2 is new.

DIRCM is line of sight, which is not the same as targeting a missile. And you still haven't said why you think they're better. Resolution? Range? Sensor fusion? It may just be a MAWS.

You referring to Su-57? The design philosophy is different. The MAWS is UV based. UV MAWS have very low false alarms, but in exchange they have a very short range. I'm guessing below 50Km. This is specially useful for SEAD/DEAD and WVR combat where short range missiles come into play, since it can only detect the booster. The more stealthy the aircraft, the better is the capability of the UV MAWS since it can get very close to the enemy and be able to use the sesors at their highest efficiency.

That's like saying that a spear is basically the same thing as a sniper rifle.

The hardware on the MAWS is pretty much the same. You are confusing its utility with the helmet.

No, they said it did M1.2 for 150 miles. Cruise implies constant speed, if the speed was falling, they didn't maintain M1.2. They never said anything about slowing down during that period. The reason for the 150 miles is probably because that was the mission they modelled.

After hitting supersonic speeds, the F-35 can hold a mach 1.2 speed for about 10-11 min without AB before it starts dropping. It can't maintain supercruise, it simply uses its less draggy airframe design to stay supersonic for a short time. It can't accelerate again without ABs. That's not supercruise.

What the F-35 does it tactically irrelevant.

No it can't.

Air Marshal Nambiar:

Rafale fighter jets to reach India tomorrow; here's how it's better than China's Chengdu J20

Arrival of Rafale jets comes amid escalating border tension between India and China along Line of Actual Control. Though China claims air superiority over India, induction of Rafale fighter aircraft into Air Force could give India much-needed confidence t

www.businesstoday.in

Capability to supercruise even with four missiles, stealth characteristics all put together make the Rafale far more potent than Su 35 also," Nambiar added.

 

[BMD]

The CCD is excellent. The Indian version also comes with IRST. As for OTS, it's already been demonstrated, but they won't say how it was done. But the F4.2 is new.



You referring to Su-57? The design philosophy is different. The MAWS is UV based. UV MAWS have very low false alarms, but in exchange they have a very short range. I'm guessing below 50Km. This is specially useful for SEAD/DEAD and WVR combat where short range missiles come into play, since it can only detect the booster. The more stealthy the aircraft, the better is the capability of the UV MAWS since it can get very close to the enemy and be able to use the sesors at their highest efficiency.



The hardware on the MAWS is pretty much the same. You are confusing its utility with the helmet.



After hitting supersonic speeds, the F-35 can hold a mach 1.2 speed for about 10-11 min without AB before it starts dropping. It can't maintain supercruise, it simply uses its less draggy airframe design to stay supersonic for a short time. It can't accelerate again without ABs. That's not supercruise.

What the F-35 does it tactically irrelevant.



Air Marshal Nambiar:

Rafale fighter jets to reach India tomorrow; here's how it's better than China's Chengdu J20

Arrival of Rafale jets comes amid escalating border tension between India and China along Line of Actual Control. Though China claims air superiority over India, induction of Rafale fighter aircraft into Air Force could give India much-needed confidence t

www.businesstoday.in

Capability to supercruise even with four missiles, stealth characteristics all put together make the Rafale far more potent than Su 35 also," Nambiar added.

There's your problem, won't say how it was done. Let's not forget the newest WVR missiles don't necessarily need it for target acquisition.

The disadvantage of UUV is that they require the missile motor to still be burning and it needs to be solid propellant and given that future trends will see low temp. motors, that's a bad thing.

Not even close.

That statement doesn't make sense at all. If it holds M1.2, for any period, there is no reason for its speed to ever drop until it runs out of fuel. More fuel burned means lighter and hence less drag. Some people have extracted what they'd like to believe from the statement rather than what the words actually say. If it holds a supersonic speed without afterburner, that's supercruise technically, however from an F-22 perspective it isn't but then neither is what the Rafale can do. No one said it can't accelerate to supersonic without aft either, this is just stuff you made up.

"Capability to supercruise with 4 missiles," no tanks, therefore irrelevant. A Typhoon can hit M1.5 with just an A2A load and M1.2 with 2 tanks in tow. What the Rafale does is worthless.

 

[randomradio]

There's your problem, won't say how it was done. Let's not forget the newest WVR missiles don't necessarily need it for target acquisition.

IRST could cue missiles since the 80s.

Zooming and targeting are pretty basic fuctions for electro-optical sensors, especially when the Rafale is also meant to carry DIRCM.

The disadvantage of UUV is that they require the missile motor to still be burning and it needs to be solid propellant and given that future trends will see low temp. motors, that's a bad thing.

We do not yet know completely about the full Atoll hardware configuration. We now know there are two more sensors on the side bays. When you have more than twice as many sensors as the F-35, then the comparison ends right there.

Again, the design philosophy for the MAWS is different. It does what the F-35's EODAS does, only in a different spectrum. And then, it has 4 additional radars and various other sensors that the F-35 completely lacks.

In foggy or rainy conditions, the F-35's EODAS becomes completely useless. Whereas the Su-57's MAWS continues functioning since it's all-weather.

That statement doesn't make sense at all. If it holds M1.2, for any period, there is no reason for its speed to ever drop until it runs out of fuel. More fuel burned means lighter and hence less drag. Some people have extracted what they'd like to believe from the statement rather than what the words actually say. If it holds a supersonic speed without afterburner, that's supercruise technically, however from an F-22 perspective it isn't but then neither is what the Rafale can do. No one said it can't accelerate to supersonic without aft either, this is just stuff you made up.

The fact that it can only manage 150 miles is enough proof. You are looking for things that aren't there.

The F-35 has plenty of issues when going at supersonic speeds, like overheating of avionics and degradation of the stealth coating.

The Pentagon will have to live with limits on F-35’s supersonic flights

The Navy's and Marine Corps' versions of the F-35 will have restrictions on how long they can fly at supersonic speeds because of a risk of damage to the tail section.

www.defensenews.com

For the F-35, as opposed to the F-22 where supersonic flight is baked into its tactics, the ability to fly supersonic is more of a “break glass in case of emergency” feature, said Bryan Clark, an analyst with the Hudson Institute and a retired naval officer.
“Supersonic flight is not a big feature of the F-35,” Clark said. “It’s capable of it, but when you talk to F-35 pilots, they’ll say they’d fly supersonic in such limited times and cases that — while having the ability is nice because you never know when you are going to need to run away from something very fast — it’s just not a main feature for their tactics.”

In fact, going supersonic obviates the main advantages of the F-35, Clark said. “It sort of defeats all the main advantages of the F-35,” he explained. “It takes you out of stealthiness, it burns gas like crazy so you lose the range benefits of a single engine and larger fuel tank. When you go into afterburner, you are heating up the outside of your aircraft.”

That creates all kinds of signatures that can be detected by an adversary, Clark said.

They themselves think going supersonic is a bad idea for the F-35.

"Capability to supercruise with 4 missiles," no tanks, therefore irrelevant. A Typhoon can hit M1.5 with just an A2A load and M1.2 with 2 tanks in tow. What the Rafale does is worthless.

Just a second ago you didn't even believe the Rafale could supercruise. Dunno why you are comparing it with the Typhoon now. No one is saying the Rafale is better than the Typhoon at supercruise. And the Typhoon is only a participant in both tenders anyway.

The Rafale can supercruise, the F-35 cannot. Simply put, it's a bad idea for the F-35 to go sueprsonic, whereas for the Rafale supercruise is a design feature.

 

[Innominate]

There's your problem, won't say how it was done. Let's not forget the newest WVR missiles don't necessarily need it for target acquisition.

The disadvantage of UUV is that they require the missile motor to still be burning and it needs to be solid propellant and given that future trends will see low temp. motors, that's a bad thing.

Not even close.

That statement doesn't make sense at all. If it holds M1.2, for any period, there is no reason for its speed to ever drop until it runs out of fuel. More fuel burned means lighter and hence less drag. Some people have extracted what they'd like to believe from the statement rather than what the words actually say. If it holds a supersonic speed without afterburner, that's supercruise technically, however from an F-22 perspective it isn't but then neither is what the Rafale can do. No one said it can't accelerate to supersonic without aft either, this is just stuff you made up.

"Capability to supercruise with 4 missiles," no tanks, therefore irrelevant. A Typhoon can hit M1.5 with just an A2A load and M1.2 with 2 tanks in tow. What the Rafale does is worthless.

HE doesn't understand. He also doesn't understand that the F-15 with 104 air to air kills rarely went supersonic during combat for obvious reasons.

 

[Innominate]

IRST could cue missiles since the 80s.

Zooming and targeting are pretty basic fuctions for electro-optical sensors, especially when the Rafale is also meant to carry DIRCM.



We do not yet know completely about the full Atoll hardware configuration. We now know there are two more sensors on the side bays. When you have more than twice as many sensors as the F-35, then the comparison ends right there.

Again, the design philosophy for the MAWS is different. It does what the F-35's EODAS does, only in a different spectrum. And then, it has 4 additional radars and various other sensors that the F-35 completely lacks.

In foggy or rainy conditions, the F-35's EODAS becomes completely useless. Whereas the Su-57's MAWS continues functioning since it's all-weather.



The fact that it can only manage 150 miles is enough proof. You are looking for things that aren't there.

The F-35 has plenty of issues when going at supersonic speeds, like overheating of avionics and degradation of the stealth coating.

The Pentagon will have to live with limits on F-35’s supersonic flights

The Navy's and Marine Corps' versions of the F-35 will have restrictions on how long they can fly at supersonic speeds because of a risk of damage to the tail section.

www.defensenews.com

For the F-35, as opposed to the F-22 where supersonic flight is baked into its tactics, the ability to fly supersonic is more of a “break glass in case of emergency” feature, said Bryan Clark, an analyst with the Hudson Institute and a retired naval officer.
“Supersonic flight is not a big feature of the F-35,” Clark said. “It’s capable of it, but when you talk to F-35 pilots, they’ll say they’d fly supersonic in such limited times and cases that — while having the ability is nice because you never know when you are going to need to run away from something very fast — it’s just not a main feature for their tactics.”

In fact, going supersonic obviates the main advantages of the F-35, Clark said. “It sort of defeats all the main advantages of the F-35,” he explained. “It takes you out of stealthiness, it burns gas like crazy so you lose the range benefits of a single engine and larger fuel tank. When you go into afterburner, you are heating up the outside of your aircraft.”

That creates all kinds of signatures that can be detected by an adversary, Clark said.

They themselves think going supersonic is a bad idea for the F-35.



Just a second ago you didn't even believe the Rafale could supercruise. Dunno why you are comparing it with the Typhoon now. No one is saying the Rafale is better than the Typhoon at supercruise. And the Typhoon is only a participant in both tenders anyway.

The Rafale can supercruise, the F-35 cannot. Simply put, it's a bad idea for the F-35 to go sueprsonic, whereas for the Rafale supercruise is a design feature.

Lol. Here's what the Swill evaluation found.

1. The flight performance of all types of aircraft under evaluation are carefully analyzed. Supersonic speed, climbing power and acceleration capacity are important properties of a combat aircraft, also with regard to its use in the air police service. For this reason, among other things, armed training aircraft do not meet the operational requirements of Switzerland, not for daily air policing, let alone for higher-intensity missions.

Switzerland is evaluating version F-35A. In the evaluation, this version completed the same test program as the other candidates, including an air police mission in the supersonic range. The aforementioned stealth property of the F-35A is not damaged; the restriction mentioned in the question therefore does not apply to the evaluated version F-35A.

2. Like the other fighter jets evaluated, the F-35A is a multi-role fighter. It is suitable for air-to-air missions as well as for air-to-ground missions and is not only designed for the latter. The Federal Council has stated that new combat aircraft are primarily procured for the protection and defense of the population as well as their own airspace, but must also be able to support the ground forces. Stealth properties are useful for the protection and defense of the airspace, because defending aircraft can only be seen later and at a shorter distance by an attacker and are therefore less vulnerable.

The choice of aircraft type will have no impact on Switzerland's basic security policy and military orientation.

Geschäft Ansehen

www.parlament.ch

 

[randomradio]

Lol. Here's what the Swill evaluation found.

Geschäft Ansehen

www.parlament.ch

The Swiss answer is not to the point. It only says it's irrelevant to the Swiss and that the F-35 meets the basic dash speed requirements that they want.

Most air forces only need dash speed for a few minutes for air policing. The F-35A will comfortably manage that at about mach 1.4-1.5. So there's nothing strange about it. What the F-35 cannot sustain is a continuous supersonic speed for a long time, which it's not been designed for.

HE doesn't understand. He also doesn't understand that the F-15 with 104 air to air kills rarely went supersonic during combat for obvious reasons.

So the USAF is wrong for including supercruise in the F-22?

 

[Innominate]

The Swiss answer is not to the point. It only says it's irrelevant to the Swiss and that the F-35 meets the basic dash speed requirements that they want.

Most air forces only need dash speed for a few minutes for air policing. The F-35A will comfortably manage that at about mach 1.4-1.5. So there's nothing strange about it. What the F-35 cannot sustain is a continuous supersonic speed for a long time, which it's not been designed for.


So the USAF is wrong for including supercruise in the F-22?

Nice selective reading lets make sure you read this part again...

Switzerland is evaluating version F-35A. In the evaluation, this version completed the same test program as the other candidates, including an air police mission in the supersonic range. The aforementioned stealth property of the F-35A is not damaged; the restriction mentioned in the question therefore does not apply to the evaluated version F-35A.

Lol. The coating damaged happened to F-35C F-35B once and it could not be replicated again when they tried multiple times so during PEACE time they set a time limit which an F-35C and F-35B can fly at mach speeds which the restriction can easily be lifted. Btw this issue was documented while the jet was flying at the very edge of its flight envelope meaning very high altitude and speed. Also this "restriction" doesn't apply to the F-35A, chuckles.

In 2014, Lockheed introduced a more durable coating in Lot 8 to better withstand the thermal shock wave. But because JPO failed to replicate the same conditions to test the new coatings for almost a decade and little combat utility of sustained Mach 1.4+ flight – they decided not to waste more resources into this issue by putting advisory restriction for F-35B and F-35C’s use on afterburners at supersonic regime.

• F-35B: 80 sec. at Mach 1.2 and 40 sec. at Mach 1.3
• F-35C: 50 sec. at Mach 1.3

It’s important to understand that both F-35B and F-35C can still cruise at Mach 1.6 top speed with combat load, just not for a very long period. Though about a minute of Mach 1.4+ flight is counterproductive – the fuel burnt will dramatically reduce endurance.

And if the situation demands – there’s nothing stopping a F-35B/C pilot from exceeding these advisory limits in combat. These restrictions are there only to avoid unnecessary damage in peace time operations.

The F-35 can cruise at Mach 1.2 on dry thrust for 150 miles in combat config.[1] but Lockheed doesn’t market F-35 as ‘supercruise’ because unlike others USAF defines supercruise as Mach 1.5+ on dry thrust, not just breaking the sound barrier.

Like many things in F-35 program, these restrictions are taken out of proportion. At the end of the day, F-35 can sustain supersonic flight far better than almost any 4th gen. aircraft in combat config.

The F-35’s Race Against Time (archive.org)

F-35 coating is more durable and advanced than F-22s which is why all F-22s switched to F-35 RAM coating.

Was it wrong to include mach 2.5 on F-15 when only a handful of F-15s during air to air combat barely reached mach 1.1?

Rafale is a fail the Swiss Gov knows it and if India was offered the F-35 the Rafale would have failed there too.

 

[randomradio]

Nice selective reading lets make sure you read this part again...



Lol. The coating damaged happened to F-35C F-35B once and it could not be replicated again when they tried multiple times so during PEACE time they set a time limit which an F-35C and F-35B can fly at mach speeds which the restriction can easily be lifted. Btw this issue was documented while the jet was flying at the very edge of its flight envelope meaning very high altitude and speed. Also this "restriction" doesn't apply to the F-35A, chuckles.


And if the situation demands – there’s nothing stopping a F-35B/C pilot from exceeding these advisory limits in combat. These restrictions are there only to avoid unnecessary damage in peace time operations.

The F-35 can cruise at Mach 1.2 on dry thrust for 150 miles in combat config.[1] but Lockheed doesn’t market F-35 as ‘supercruise’ because unlike others USAF defines supercruise as Mach 1.5+ on dry thrust, not just breaking the sound barrier.

Like many things in F-35 program, these restrictions are taken out of proportion. At the end of the day, F-35 can sustain supersonic flight far better than almost any 4th gen. aircraft in combat config.


F-35 coating is more durable and advanced than F-22s which is why all F-22s switched to F-35 RAM coating.

Was it wrong to include mach 2.5 on F-15 when only a handful of F-15s during air to air combat barely reached mach 1.1?

Rafale is a fail the Swiss Gov knows it and if India was offered the F-35 the Rafale would have failed there too.

The Swiss care about dash speed, as they have pointed out in their previous tender, which gave Typhoon the highest points for this feature. And the F-35's dash speed is not important to the USAF because they have the F-22 for that role, but other air forces that plan on only operating the F-35 will obviously have this need. It's actually why larger air forces like Japan, Korea and Turkey also have an alternative program that focuses on air superiority. So what applies to the US doesn't necessarily apply to the other air forces, especially the Swiss and Finnish who desire a jet capable of meeting all their requirements for air policing.

And yes, as I have pointed out to the other gentleman, the concept of supercruise is different from what the F-35 actually does. A low drag aircraft barely managing to stay supersonic for sometime isn't supercruise, and is completely different from a fighter jet that can go supersonic using dry thrust alone. Also, no, LM doesn't specify any particular speed for supercruise, because it changes based on altitude. It's only a general rule of thumb that any tactically relevant supercruise needs to be at least much, much faster than transonic speeds. But the basic definition is anything that can manage more than mach 1 on dry thrust is called supercruise.

As for India, we need a fully operational, high flying, supersonic twin-engine jet capable of air superiority and deep penetration strikes, which the F-35 is not designed for. The Himalayas are far too unforgiving towards single-engine jets. And it's not as simple as just having stealth. Anyway, the IAF doesn't consider jets like the F-22 and F-35 stealth jets, as per the words of our own air chief. He said only jets like the B-2 and Neuron can be called stealth. So our current requirements won't match with the F-35 anyway, never mind the fact that it still has to climb up to Block 4+ for it to generate any interest in India.

 

[randomradio]

Swiss care about many things which F-35 is superior at which is why it is way ahead of Rafale.



This is by far the dumbest post yet. You're a piece of work I'm still trying to figure out if you're ignorant or a liar that has lied so much to folks in here who are likely as ignorant when it comes to fighter aircraft that you have started to believe your lie.

The F-35 is superior to any 4th gen including the Ra-fail in air to air and air to ground and this BS claim that Himalayas are unforgiving to the F-35 when the F-35 has a combat ceiling of 50.000 feet is laughable and it shows your ignorance/lie. I couldn't care less of the OPINION of an IAF air chief of what he thinks is stealth. What hubris from an Indian whos nations air force is famous for how many fighter pilots its planes kill every year to say he doesn't consider the F-22 and F-35 stealth is LAUGHABLE!!! A nation who buys its air force from other countries and whos "indigenous fighter" program is dependent on US engines and other foreign tech. Hindu puh-leeze!

F-35's range is greater than an F-15 with two tanks which is a combat configurations, bub.

It's clear you do not understand this subject.

The Himalayas, or even ice and oceans, are absolutely unforgiving to any single engine jet simply because if the engine fails, even after a successful ejection, a pilot can still get killed by the elements. It's the same reason why even the USN is not very excited about the F-35C, hence the need for only 200+ jets out of a total requirement exceeding 1000.

As for the IAF's crash record, you have been suckered by the media. Their crash record is pretty much the same as in western countries, which is actually much more impressive because we operate older jets and in harsher environments than the US does.

This figure is from half a decade ago. As of 2 years ago, it's 4-5 per 100,000 hours. The same as in NATO countries. Again, it's very, very impressive considering we operate Soviet era jets at NATO level readiness.

Furthermore, India's worst figure for the Mig-21 was 25 per 100,000 hours.

Otoh, when it comes to the same generation, the US does far worse.

At 30.63 per 100,000 hours, USAF's performance has been way, way worse than the IAF's. Also, the F-104's "years of service" is merely 28 years, whereas it's been almost 60 years for the Mig-21.

You should stop embarrassing the USAF any further than this.