3900 replies to this topic

[waldo]

But it doesn't as you can see, and has already been posted. The F-35 can go farther on internal fuel than any other option. The same is true on external fuel.

so what are the range numbers... the ones that seem to be in 'dispute'... you know, relative to the typical flight mode suggested/anticipated for northern patrol/reconnaissance? You know, not "combat range"...

nothing to say about that suggested measly 8% gain that drop tanks bring to the overall F-35 range?

[Smallc]

so what are the range numbers... the ones that seem to be in 'dispute'... you know, relative to the typical flight mode suggested/anticipated for northern patrol/reconnaissance? You know, not "combat range"...

I'm not even sure what you're talking about, really. The F-35A has 2.5x the range of what it replaced, and that's the F-16. 8% gain from drop tanks? What? Do you, you know, happen to have some kind of credible source for that?

Also, do you think that planes on patrol without ordinance (the ferry range for the F-18 that you're talking about) is at all useful, or relevant? You aren't even comparing the same numbers.

[DogOnPorch]

I'm not even sure what you're talking about, really. The F-35A has 2.5x the range of what it replaced, and that's the F-16. 8% gain from drop tanks? What? Do you, you know, happen to have some kind of credible source for that?

Also, do you think that planes on patrol without ordinance (the ferry range for the F-18 that you're talking about) is at all useful, or relevant? You aren't even comparing the same numbers.

As mentioned, it's revolutionary that the F-35 doesn't have a steering wheel and an automatic transmission to many.

Joe Public: Where does the oil go??

[waldo]

Also, do you think that planes on patrol without ordinance (the ferry range for the F-18 that you're talking about) is at all useful, or relevant? You aren't even comparing the same numbers.

you're all about "combat/interceptor" flying... how much of that type of flying and related fuel usage is associated with typical (northern) patrol/reconnaissance flying?

care to give representative examples of the type of CF-18 combat/interceptor flying over these last decades...

[Smallc]

you're all about "combat/interceptor" flying...

Nice attempt at a deflect. Again, what are the relevant differences between the range of an aircraft, and the ferry range of an aircraft? What good is a fighter with no weapons?

[cybercoma]

Also, do you think that planes on patrol without ordinance (the ferry range for the F-18 that you're talking about) is at all useful, or relevant? You aren't even comparing the same numbers.

Patrolling, is that all our jets are going to be used for? Or will it be necessary to have better range capabilities for the multitude of tasks they'll probably be required to do?

[waldo]

Nice attempt at a deflect. Again, what are the relevant differences between the range of an aircraft, and the ferry range of an aircraft? What good is a fighter with no weapons?

didn't think you were that obtuse... or is it purposeful? Do you think there are degrees of flying/range between "ferry" and "combat"... that would align with more typical patrol/reconnaissance? As for deflection... yours... care to actually answer the question you avoided. Here, once again: "care to give representative examples of the type of CF-18 combat/interceptor flying over these last decades"? We have you so cavalierly dispensing with the CF-18 fleet manager's assessment... you know, the guy with familiarity on how the CF-18's have been utilized to-date within Canada - go figure!

[Smallc]

Patrolling, is that all our jets are going to be used for? Or will it be necessary to have better range capabilities for the multitude of tasks they'll probably be required to do?

This jet has the best range available.

didn't think you were that obtuse... or is it purposeful? Do you think there are degrees of flying/range between "ferry" and "combat"... that would align with more typical patrol/reconnaissance?

Yes, and the F-35 will have better range in all of those missions. It simply won't go quite as fast. On internal fuel, the F-35 has range that simply can't be matched by the F-18.

Edited by Smallc, 27 April 2012 - 02:08 PM.

[waldo]

Yes, and the F-35 will have better range in all of those missions. It simply won't go quite as fast. On internal fuel, the F-35 has range that simply can't be matched by the F-18.

how so? Just a few posts back, you were the guy talking up the need to maximize range before leveraging air-fuelers... so, see CF-18 external drop tanks. What's that... you want to forgo the F-35 "stealth" to presume to claim better range than the CF-18... is that right? Oh my, that's an awful lot to pay for ditching "stealth", hey? Oh wait, didn't I just mention something about F-35 external tanks providing only a measly 8% gain over the internal storage.

[Smallc]

how so? Just a few posts back, you were the guy talking up the need to maximize range before leveraging air-fuelers... so, see CF-18 external drop tanks. What's that... you want to forgo the F-35 "stealth" to presume to claim better range than the CF-18... is that right? Oh my, that's an awful lot to pay for ditching "stealth", hey?

The F-35 is still stealth when it drops the tanks. The CF-18 isn't. I didn't realize that you were so dense.

Oh wait, didn't I just mention something about F-35 external tanks providing only a measly 8% gain over the internal storage.

Yes, you mentioned that. I'm not sure I see the relevance. You're comparing a naked F-18 carrying 3 tanks, and an F-35 with 2 tanks and internal weapons payload.

Edited by Smallc, 27 April 2012 - 02:59 PM.

[waldo]

The F-35 is still stealth when it drops the tanks. The CF-18 isn't. I didn't realize that you were so dense.

hey now... before those tanks are dropped... while they're still carrying gasolina... how's that F-35 "stealth" working out for you? CF-18 stealth??? Did not know it was "stealth worthy"... at all! Talk about (your) denseness

Yes, you mentioned that. I'm not sure I see the relevance. You're comparing a naked F-18 carrying 3 tanks, and an F-35 with 2 tanks and internal weapons payload.

the relevance is you puffed up and made claims based on F-35 external storage... and the net (measly) impact is they only add 8% to the range.

[dre]

The F-35 is still stealth when it drops the tanks. The CF-18 isn't. I didn't realize that you were so dense.



Yes, you mentioned that. I'm not sure I see the relevance. You're comparing a naked F-18 carrying 3 tanks, and an F-35 with 2 tanks and internal weapons payload.

Its useless talking about stealth in the context of arctic patrols anyways. The whole point is to have a presense... you WANT to be seen. Both stealth and air to ground capabilities are mostly usefull for the kind of operations we should not be involved in, in the first place... namely wiping out random darkies in the middle east and taxing Canadians to solve the rest of the worlds problems.

[Smallc]

hey now... before those tanks are dropped... while they're still carrying gasolina... how's that F-35 "stealth" working out for you? CF-18 stealth??? Did not know it was "stealth worthy"... at all! Talk about (your) denseness

My only response -

the relevance is you puffed up and made claims based on F-35 external storage... and the net (measly) impact is they only add 8% to the range.

Possibly. We have no final numbers on that. Still, the F-35 will leave a greater range when carrying weapons than any of the available competitors.

Edited by Smallc, 27 April 2012 - 03:17 PM.

[Derek L]

the retired CF-18 'fleet manager's' statement suggests the F-35 has less range than the CF-18... and that from a Canadian north patrol/reconnaissance aspect, the F-35 is disadvantaged in relation to the CF-18. This same range reference shows up, many times over across various sites... if the guy has it wrong, if all these other appearances of the same reference are wrong, just what are the range numbers that would correspond to that type of flight mode; i.e., patrol/reconnaissance?

I've also read several references that suggest the F-35 drop tanks only realize a minimal 8% gain over the range associated with the internal tank... drag performance considerations. In any case, MLW member punked hit the other point I was lining up around - stealth. If you're so accepting to dropping stealth for maximizing range... and that, supposedly, that dropping stealth only realizes you an additional (and measly) 8% range gain, isn't "dropping stealth" a non-starter?

but again, what are the range numbers for the flight mode associated with flying patrol/reconnaissance... CF-18 versus F-35?

That’s indeed what he suggested, either due to a brain fart or to mislead. As for the range itself, the numbers as posted by smallc, are the very reflection of that. The Hornet’s numbers include drop tanks versus the F-35’s with just internal fuel, now obviously the addition of drop tanks (The very same as used on the Hornet, Eagle etc) will increase the F-35’s range.

As for the ~8% factor, that really depends on the calculation and contrasting the internal fuel capacity of both the Hornet and F-35. If the F-35 carriers more than double the internal fuel than the Hornet, quite obviously carrying a single 480 gal drop tank will increase each aircraft’s percentage differently. As for (negative) drag performance, that to depends on what’s carried and by what aircraft.

For your NORPAT, if each aircraft is carrying several short and medium range missiles (With the F-35 internally), and the F-35 two under wing tanks and the Hornet carrying two under wing and one centerline (To bring the Hornet’s capacity closer to the F-35s), quite obviously the F-35 will be less impacted by drag.

As for stealth, again for conducting the vast majority of our NORPATs, stealth is not a requirement, but if it becomes so (even during said mission) the F-35 can fulfill said stealth requirement (by dropping it’s tanks) where as the Hornet (or any other 4+ generation aircraft) can not.

[Derek L]

This jet has the best range available.



Yes, and the F-35 will have better range in all of those missions. It simply won't go quite as fast. On internal fuel, the F-35 has range that simply can't be matched by the F-18.

Negative Ghostrider, the max speed numbers released by Lockheed (Mach 1.6) are including a full internal weapons load by the F-35, the Hornet carrying several JDAMS, external tanks and missiles (to equal the F-35’s internal capacity) are not going anywhere near the Boeing’s stated max speed (Mach 1.8) unless going on a rapid earthbound trajectory……….Then of course you can factor in both manufactures stated max g-ratings (F-35= 9+…F/A-18= ~7.5-8)………