F-35 can't take the F-16 in a dog fight?

[Troubleshot]

In a mock dogfight over the Pacific Ocean, a test fight for Lockheed’s F-35 Lightning II, the most expensive weapon in U.S. history, the F-35 was bested by America’s trusty F-16 Fighting Falcon – first flown in 1974.

Read more: http://www.wearethemighty.com/usafs-350 ... z3ekcfAUAO

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/f-35-lightning ... on-1508880

http://arstechnica.com/information-tech ... d-by-f-16/

[Rockie]

Read more: http://www.wearethemighty.com/usafs-350 ... z3ekhxY6Hh


"Essentially, the F-35 pilot couldn’t watch his six because his helmet was too big."

Even if his head and helmet were the size of a golf ball he still couldn't watch his six. The fuselage is in the way.

Cue the arguments that no one will get in an F35's six because they'll be dead long before they get a chance.

[niss]

It's no big deal if he cant see behind him, just as long as he can join him in an inverted 4G dive.

[loopy]

20-30 years ago the 35 would not be given the "F" designation. It would have been an "A" for attack, not fighter. It's a bomb truck not a fighter. Canada and other NATO allies need to wake up and realize they are not purchasing an aircraft appropriate for air defence, they are buying an attack aircraft which needs other aircraft to defend it because it can't do a very good job of defending itself from aerial attack.

[niss]

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-the- ... y-an-f-16/

A counterpoint?

[iflyforpie]

Read more: http://www.wearethemighty.com/usafs-350 ... z3ekhxY6Hh


"Essentially, the F-35 pilot couldn’t watch his six because his helmet was too big."

Even if his head and helmet were the size of a golf ball he still couldn't watch his six. The fuselage is in the way.

Cue the arguments that no one will get in an F35's six because they'll be dead long before they get a chance.

How can that be so?

I thought that super duper helmet tied into external cameras that gave an UNIMPEDED 360 +/- 90 degree view outside the aircraft.

At least... ....that's what the brochure said. Maybe they need a backup camera like you can get on a Ford Fiesta...

[Big Pistons Forever]

For the Fighter Drivers out there.

In the last 30 years how many air to air kills for any fighter engagement anywhere, have occurred without a positive visual ID before the trigger got pulled ?

[trampbike]

Why the F-35 vs F-16 article is garbage

http://fightersweep.com/2548/f-35-v-f-1 ... e-garbage/

[Rockie]

Why the F-35 vs F-16 article is garbage

http://fightersweep.com/2548/f-35-v-f-1 ... e-garbage/

Many years ago I led a 4V4 against F-15's led by their resident weapons guy. In the course of one engagement my #4 (brand new guy) "killed" 3 of them because they didn't see him. While they lost the engagement their lead did his level best to win the debrief afterward and in doing so completely missed the inherent lesson.

The clean F-35 repeatedly and consistently lost maneuvering fights against an F-16 loaded up with external tanks. There's just no way to parse that into something it's not. The F-35 is useless as a fighter.

Its proponents are trying to win the debrief.

[AuxBatOn]

Why the F-35 vs F-16 article is garbage

http://fightersweep.com/2548/f-35-v-f-1 ... e-garbage/

Many years ago I led a 4V4 against F-15's led by their resident weapons guy. In the course of one engagement my #4 (brand new guy) "killed" 3 of them because they didn't see him. While they lost the engagement their lead did his level best to win the debrief afterward and in doing so completely missed the inherent lesson.

The clean F-35 repeatedly and consistently lost maneuvering fights against an F-16 loaded up with external tanks. There's just no way to parse that into something it's not. The F-35 is useless as a fighter.

Its proponents are trying to win the debrief.

Judging a group from a single experiment, great.

As far as the F-35 goes, that's because the F-35 is not a fighter, it's a self-escort strike aircraft, capable of conducting Air-to-Air.

You know as well as I know that this was an early test flight with likely very canned setups. Likely a mix of offensive, defensive, slow speed and neutral sets. The aircraft didn't even have half the capabilities it has now. Not to mention the Viper driver had 1500 hrs in the Viper and the F-35 guy maybe had 100. Oh, and no TTPs have been developped by the Weapons School yet for the F-35 (the Viper benefits from 35 years of TTP development).

I don't think it's fair to compare the F-16 (designed with dogfight in mind) to the F-35 (designed with the multi-role in mind).

As far as kills BVR: Half of the kills during Op Desert Storm and all of them during Allied Force and some in between (Southern/Northern Watch)

[Rockie]

I don't think it's fair to compare the F-16 (designed with dogfight in mind) to the F-35 (designed with the multi-role in mind).

It's totally fair. The F-16 is an exceptional multi-role aircraft that does everything except cost over 1 TRILLION dollars and fail to live up to expectations. They even trained for the strike role back in the day and may still.

[AuxBatOn]

It's an okay striker (payload anin't that great) and a good dogfighter. It was still designed for dogfight at its very beginning.

[xchox]

Gripen.

The only thing the cry baby's can come up with is it has one engine... Well Brazil uses it over the rainforest, Sweden & Czech Republic use it over identical terrain to ours. Add to that Seden uses there's over open ocean and operates on roads similar to ours. No need to land and refuel at a base or airport.

[howard40]

Way back when ... when Canada was buying 126 or whatever CF 18's, I thought they should buy say 60 odd CF18's and 200 odd F 16's for the same money.. Use the F 18's for "bush" and north stuff, and have a ball with the F 16's down south...

[ahramin]

I only have one problem with the F-35: Price. Replace it with any other multi-role aircraft in production and you get massively more bang for your buck. But then that's really not surprising considering Lockheed got caught with a $100M "accounting error" during the contest with Boeing which was sweethearted under the rug. Fraud and scam are really the name of the game for the F-35.

[Mostly Harmless]

Non F-35 question here for the experts...

Saw an F-22 heading out with an F-16 in trail to go practice (presumably)... how do those two stack up? Who wins that dog fight?

Just curious.

[iflyforpie]

Gripen.

The only thing the cry baby's can come up with is it has one engine... Well Brazil uses it over the rainforest, Sweden & Czech Republic use it over identical terrain to ours. Add to that Seden uses there's over open ocean and operates on roads similar to ours. No need to land and refuel at a base or airport.

Go look at a map of the Czech Republic or Sweden superimposed over Canada. The toughest thing the Czech guy is going to have to deal with is which beer to order after he gets to the ground.

Where will you succumb to the elements first? The Rainforest? Or the tundra? Hypothermia will kill you in a matter of hours without heat and shelter. You think the SAR boys are that quick in the high arctic?

[trampbike]

Why the F-35 vs F-16 article is garbage

http://fightersweep.com/2548/f-35-v-f-1 ... e-garbage/

Many years ago I led a 4V4 against F-15's led by their resident weapons guy. In the course of one engagement my #4 (brand new guy) "killed" 3 of them because they didn't see him. While they lost the engagement their lead did his level best to win the debrief afterward and in doing so completely missed the inherent lesson.

Cool story bro...

The clean F-35 repeatedly and consistently lost maneuvering fights against an F-16 loaded up with external tanks. There's just no way to parse that into something it's not. The F-35 is useless as a fighter.

Its proponents are trying to win the debrief.

In 20 years, we can have this debrief.

[Mostly Harmless]

Non F-35 question here for the experts...

Saw an F-22 heading out with an F-16 in trail to go practice (presumably)... how do those two stack up? Who wins that dog fight?

Just curious.

Really? Not one of you? No experts willing to put forward an opinion or story?

[iflyforpie]

In reality, the enemy won't go after the F-22 or the F-35. The terrorists and revolutionaries will conduct business as usual in their caves and mud huts and if the US or NATO ever goes up against more than a ragtag Air Force, they will strike at the support infrastructure with far superior numbers than the sequestered US will be able to procure. Why shoot down an F-22 when shooting down a tanker or two will take down a whole wing of them?