Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: F-35 versus
jessmo_24    5/12/2011 4:57:14 AM
I know that these threads are the scourge of the internet but bear with me a moment. in my personal opinion i wrote a very nice counter point on sweetmans blog the other day and I thought it would be interesting to follow things up. here are some things though you must know. 1. I understand that aircraft don't fight on a 1 on 1 basis. I know that the U.S. in particular thinks of the fighter plane as part of a system. so please don't take this the wrong way. Please no soap box nerd rage. 2. I dont know anything about any military aircraft that isn't public domain. I don't pretend to be a specialist. I don't have clearance. I'm just a hard working blue collar guy with a hard on for aviation. 3. with that being said I have been around the forums for awhile and have learned a great deal from the likes of the illustrators Herald, The truck driver blue wings, and GF. I don't pretend to be an expert but my opinions are slightly informed
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
jessmo_24       5/12/2011 5:04:10 AM
Keep in mind Im not trying to match up the fighters on flight envelop. neither do I pretend to know
anything Opsec. Please take what I say with a grain of salt.
Part 1 F-35 versus J-20
Part 2 F-35 versus T-50
Part 3 F-35 versus F-22
Part 4 F-35 versus euro canards
 
Part 1 F-35 versus J-20
Ok lets get down to brass tacks:
J-20 versus the F-35 in kinematic performance:
The J-20 is a large aircraft it could POSSIBLY be in the 70,000Lbs fully loaded class ( F-111 sized)
*ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chengdu_J-20
To put it bluntly even 25Klbs of thrust per engine will not be enough to keep up with a F-35 Turning and burning with a full combat load (Think maybe 5000Lb minimum combat load and enough gas to travel 1100 NMI) The Chinese will need a engine in the 35,000 thrust range( roughly the equivalent to the F-22s F-119) The TW ratio will be no where near 1:! if this isn't achieved. There is the possibility that the J-20 is either F-22 sized or that it could go for a strictly A2A load with 1/2 fuel and only a few missiles, but this would be to the U.S. advantage.
Both of these options are highly unlikely. While a heavy load like this wont be noticed much in sustained cruise this fighter wont go pulling 9Gs in a vertical scissors with the F-35.
The weight of the J-20 will be noticed in Up and away time, and recovering from turns. The only slight advantage the J-20 might have is it cruise speed.

J-20 versus the F-35 in signals managment:
There is no contest here. Unless there is a major redesign the J-20 is a mess from a U.S. perspective.
here is what I have noticed

1. The canards are not plan form aligned with the wings.
2. The canards will cause serious issues with signature management since they move independently and #1
3. There is no hint that they plan on incorporating a fix to the rear inlets( note the F-35 has specialized tail feathers and there is a solution for the reheat.)
4. Non aligned gaps
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7388/j20f22comparisoncopya.jpg" width="800" height="620" /> 

Also have they over come where to put the antennas?
Will they get a AESA with LPI? Simply put the F-35 doesn't seem like the dog in this comparison. The J-20 looks like the dog.  From a arm chair viewers point of view the F-35 is superior is nearly every respect.
 
 

 



 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       5/12/2011 5:26:37 AM
I'm far from being an expert, but I sure as heck know i've been insulted if I'm in the same company as bluewings....
 
Quote    Reply

jessmo_24       5/12/2011 1:16:59 PM
XD LOL GF I learn from fools as well as the wise.
 
Quote    Reply

Brad Piff       5/14/2011 4:56:22 PM
comparing paperplanes??
 
Quote    Reply

jessmo_24       5/15/2011 3:30:56 AM

comparing paperplanes??

Lockheed Martin has delivered the first production F-35 Lightning II to the US military to reach a long-delayed milestone, but there remains no firm timetable for inducting the new aircraft into operational service.

US Air Force officials formally accepted series-production model AF-7 at Lockheed's final
??
 
Quote    Reply

jessmo_24       5/15/2011 4:07:59 AM
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSPBTGYsIb_d6nmbc0UHgS3Bk7ZzrchcpVqXyA4LeiMwPeoRXAg&t=1" />
Part 2 T-50 versus the F-35.
 
The T-50s thrust weight.
 
 Currently we have a aircraft thats is 52,000 Lbs fully loaded, with around 64,000 Lbs of thrust.
Compared to the F-35s 49,000 pounds fully loaded F-35 (wiki says the MTOW is closer to 70,000) with 50,000 in full burner. There is no comparison here the T-50 is a pure next generation dog fighter with enough TW to out maneuver both the F-35 or the J-20. The Russians it seems have hit a sweet spot, with a proper balance of weight, thrust and range.
The F-35 will have to rely heavily on its stealth and sensors to even stand a fighting chance versus the T-50.
The range estimates how ever seem little far fetched. 3000 Nm is a long way for a fighter much smaller than the J-2.
T-50 versus F-35 in stealth.  Unlike the J-20 the T-50 does display some decent edge alignment techniques.
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll190/Darth_Kirov/PAK%20FA%20Sukhoi%20T-50/T-50Sukhoi-18.jpg" width="814" height="907" /> 
The leading edge of the wings are aligned with the tail like most successful modern stealth designs.
My  main issue with the T-50 would be concerning the  vents or  auxiliary air inlets on the engine nacelles
These vents and the all moving tails wont do the plane any favors either in the  area of signals management. And finally the the engine, is in no way what so ever stealthy  Both the T-50 and the J-20 seems to be only concerned with frontal RCS reduction, which will leave both system highly vulnerable to next generation SAMs. There are a lot of question concerning this plane.
 and In order to have moderate success against the slower F-35  the entire engine nacelle design must go.  The nacelles,
and rear of the plane are simply to loud from a RCS perspective to engage F-35s, F-22s. Both the F-35 and the F-22 can fire from BVR at mach 1.5+ basically negating the potential advantage that this plane holds and further more you cannot hit what you cannot see. when compared to the F-35 the T-30 is a mess in the area of RCS.

 http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://mulrickillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/image41.png&imgrefurl=http://mulrickillion.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/should-china-pakistan-counter-the-indian-russian-fighter-tie-up/&usg=__dl_To6h_U8iMu3tV72-xuKZi_5k=&h=202&w=400&sz=119&hl=en&start=8&zoom=1&tbnid=0tmYx7MevXxFfM:&tbnh=104&tbnw=205&ei=L4fPTf2nKebe0QGVpdXtDQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3DRussian%2BT-50%2Bbottom%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1000%26bih%3D476%26tbm%3Disch0%2C496&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=252&page=2&ndsp=8&ved=1t:429,r:6,s:8&tx=22&ty=73&biw=1000&bih=476" />
http://mulrickillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/image41.png" width="400" height="202" />
 
 
Quote    Reply

Slim Pickinz       5/15/2011 3:54:49 PM
Jessmo, do you know what the F-35 is? Because you've so far been using pictures of F-22s in your arguments...
 
Quote    Reply

jessmo_24       5/15/2011 11:21:55 PM
Indeed I do.
 
http://www.rupinews.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/air_f-35_left_wingover_rear_view_lg.jpg" width="1024" height="819" /> 
The problem comes from not having any simple cut and paste pics of the F-35 and the T-50/J-20 in a side by side comparison. People not only hate the F-35, they wont even compare the planes fairly.
If your good at photo shop perhaps you'd like to post some by side comparisons.
 
Quote    Reply

AThousandYoung       5/17/2011 1:31:17 AM
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics