-snip-
Nah, only Aussie can work me up (and does so frequently!). In you I am just sadly disillusioned by your knowledge of aerodynamics, or lack thereof apparently. ;]
Tricky Hobitses.
I leave for a day and you guys start talking about the F-35 without me, for shame. If I repeat anything anyone else said I apologize, I'm limited on time.
See Also[Development] CV9035DK: The Nordic Gunslinger - News - War ThunderXM800T - War Thunder WikiFirefly F.Mk.IV (France) - War Thunder WikiU-SH 204 GK - War Thunder WikiI don't have the time to go over all my issues with it, but it's the F-104 fiasco all over again (and Lockeed again, shocker). The Navy, Air Force, and Marines all want the aircraft to do different jobs, and it's suffering majorly for it. The marines want a close air support vehicle, but the stubby wings of the A and B models produced little lift, so it has a high stall speed (which means its horrible at the close air support role). Not to mention its very low bomb load. The Navy is getting the best version, the F-35C, as it drops the horrible lift fan that causes the fuselage to be fat creating large amounts of drag. The F-35C is a decent aircraft, but the F-35A and B aren't. No thrust vectoring, no canards, and stubby wings (designed to make VTOL easier) cause the F-35A/B to be horrible dogfighters.
Key thing to talk about here is that its major selling point was its stealth, but we need to remember that stealth, as portrayed by the media and the people trying to sell this thing, is a scam. Ground based radar can detect any stealth aircraft if you use the right low frequency wavelengths. The Russians have been doing it for ages, and they sell their radars to everyone, or license people to build the radars. That being said, the radar carried by fighter aircraft is too weak to detect stealth aircraft. Which is why in the F-15 on F-22 dogfight, the F-15 lost.
Worst of all, the F-35 program is way overbudget and is a money sink at this point. I'm just sorry that so many of our allies are gonna end up buying this thing. I sure hope they don't actually have to use them in a war against a civilized nation.
tl;dr the F-35A/B kinda sucks, F-35C is okay.
Woo Wulfman's back! Was wondering where you went...
I'm going to mostly be talking about the F-35B here, purely as it is the variant that my country will be operating - the same one that I'll be flying if I achieve my aspirations.
So although we're agreed that the brilliant avionics, impressive ordinance and fuel load will make it a good ground attacker/strike aircraft, the main concern seems to be its air-to-air capabilities, right?
First thing to note - it will out accelerate or accelerate with most everything, though unless it climbs well (undisclosed) it will not be able to escape in a combat scenario. Some have been saying that the F-35 could simply disappear at will, but I'm pretty sure that's not how it works, Lockheed.
So firstly, in regards to maneuverability, it does have a pretty bad wing-loading (only marginally better than that of an F-14). However, the way I see it is that its fuselage is actually going to be producing a substantial amount of its lift, just looking at the design.
Doubtless, the fuselage has been designed to produce lift almost as efficiently as the wings. Gone are the days when the fuselage only produced drag. This sounds optimistic, though I still don't think it'll be out turning any Sukhois anytime soon. My best guess is that it will be similar to that of the F-15 - perhaps only slightly worse than that of the Su-35.
One big advantage I see it having is energy retention. Sukhois are very good at high-G, low speed maneuvers that bleed its energy like an SoB, whereas the F-35 is percievably more streamlined, has internal weapons, is smaller, and has just as good a thrust-to-weight ratio.Ifit also has a good climb, then it could actually be quite effective at visual range fighting. Of course, the visual awareness that the F-35's helmet provides is also a big help in this regard.
I wish they had given it thrust-vectoring. It would have made so much sense, what with the VTOL weight already a fact. I really think this will be the determining factor as to why most fourth generation+ aircraft will be already advantaged in close engagements.
Edited by WhiteBison
