The first meeting of the Lightnings with the Su-35C is preparing a number of surprises. What is silent in the US Air Force
What marketing tricks and PR actions do the employees of the headquarters of the military-industrial corporation Lockheed Martin, as well as those assigned to aviation A division of the company, test pilots of the 5th generation F-35A multipurpose fighter aircraft for the successful promotion of these aircraft in the European, Middle Eastern and Asian arms markets! And this is not surprising, because the brainchild of the ambitious 1,3-trillion Joint Strike Fighter program, costing customers $ 80-90 million per unit, firstly, has a fairly controversial reputation in its class, obtained during numerous ground-based loading stands tests, tests of a computerized weapons control system, software and numerous complexes of avionics (AVL), and secondly, forever retains the "inborn" design flaws of the airframe, which negatively affect the flight performance of the machine.
Let's start with a controversial reputation. It is partially related to the package of flaws in the unobtrusive F-35A fighters, represented by a rather impressive list (966 problems) of the so-called “childhood diseases”, which are quite common both for prototypes of new military equipment and for experimental-military batches of vehicles. One such “disease” can be considered the raw software for WMS, which creates errors at the time of processing target designation data from the AN / APG-81 radar into the inertial navigation system of AIM-120C-7 / 8 missiles, which ultimately does not allow the pilot F -35A simultaneously intercept several air objects due to inaccurate radio correction data. There are software deficiencies in the OMS and in relation to the air-to-ground mode. In particular, the pilot does not have the ability to view the final coordinates of the target loaded in the INS of the corrected aerial bombs equipped with JDAM kits, which, in a difficult tactical situation, can lead to an erroneous attack on a friendly base station, a mechanized unit, or other object.
The above-mentioned “childhood diseases”, as well as the X-NUMX problems of the F-964A / B / C family, documented in the reports of the United States Audit Office (GAO) and the JSF Program Office Division, do not pose a great threat to the export potential machines of types F-35A and F-35B, since they can be completely eliminated during several stages of updating the fighter software, and customers understand this perfectly.
Another thing is the "innate" design flaws of the Lightnings, which with enviable regularity put them in an extremely awkward position during training air battles with multifunctional fighters of the US Air Force and the NATO Air Force belonging to the 4 + / ++ generations. Here, only updating the software packages is indispensable, and the main PR specialists of the JSF program come in - test pilot Billy Flynn and commander of the 56 th Fighter Aviation Regiment and director of the F-35 integration department, General Scott Pleus. Skillfully hiding behind the status of the US Air Force aces pilots, they try, by giving what they wish for, to maintain the high competitiveness of the F-35A. The statements made from their lips over the past two years not only have significant discrepancies with the real state of affairs and the technical parameters of Lightning II, but also do not correspond to common sense. Thus, in the fall of 2016, General Scott Pleus noted that the F-35A operators could count on "absolutely incredible maneuverability of their machines in close combat with 4-fighter and transitional fighters". He also indicated that these subtle fighters have complete superiority over the enemy in the DVB. But the real facts suggest otherwise.
So, back in the summer of 2015, American journalist David Ex, referring to the report of an unnamed pilot of an F-35A prototype with a board number AF-2, who participated in a training melee air combat with a two-seat multi-role fighter F-16D Block 40, reported a much smaller angle Lightning reversal speeds in the entire altitude range characteristic of the “dog dump” (3 — 9 km), which led to the confident supremacy of the Falcon, which hung on the tail of the F-35A throughout the battle. The most remarkable point is that this Lightning prototype (AF-2), according to US Air Force Major-General Jeffrey Harigan, was not covered with radio absorbing materials (RPM) weighing about 200 kg, was not equipped with AIM air combat missiles -120C-7 and AIM-9X in the internal armament compartments, and also was not equipped with an AN / AAQ-37 DAS distributed-aperture electronic complex with aperture AN and AAN-6 DAS for detecting and tracking most warm-contrast targets (this is confirmed by AF photographs -2, Aiden in the American Internet).
The conclusion is the only one: AF-2 went into battle with the Falcon "lightly", with a take-off weight of the order of 17000 kg (empty weight 12800 kg + 4200 kg of fuel), which was to ensure the car a decent thrust-weight in 1,15 kgf / kg, which means , and great flight performance. Moreover, the main trump card of the F-35A was a high-performance computerized EDSU, which allowed the fighter to implement maneuvering with angles of attack of more than 60 degrees. But this did not save Lightning from defeat. The fact is that he was confronted by a slightly “weighted” two-seater F-16D “Night Falcon” Block 40, equipped with a “General Electri” F-110-GE-100 two-circuit turbojet engine, which has a 12993 kgf load. Taking into account the 40% reduction in the amount of fuel in the internal tanks spent on takeoff and arrival in the area of the training air battle with F-35A, as well as the lack of rocket armament on the suspension units, the mass of F-16D Block 40 was about 10500 kg, which ensured significantly greater thrust-to-weight ratio (1,27 kgf / kg). Moreover, at the time of the battle, the specific load on the wing of the F-35A reached 400 kg / sq. m, while in 1,66 times lighter F-16D boasted a load on the wing in 365 kg / sq.m, and this is a much more weighty argument in favor of the Falcon.
Another serious design flaw in the F-35A line can be considered the lack of developed aerodynamic flows at the wing root (like in the MiG-29 / 35 Su-30CM, F-16C / D and F / A-18E / F Super Hornet), which significantly reduces the angular speed of the turn of the machine due to the lack of the necessary lift coefficient in front of the aerodynamic focus. As you can see, in terms of “energy maneuvering”, the F-35A (even with a half-empty fuel system and 2 AIM-9X Block II / III in the internal compartments) cannot be fought with either the MiG-29C / SMT, “Mirage 2000-5 / 9” , F-16C / D and "Typhoon", neither with "Raptors" and Su-30CM, whose engines are also equipped with a thrust vector deflection system.
“Going” in a close combat at least to the level of conventional MiG-29С, Lightnings can only be achieved due to the combination of large angles of pumping of the AIM-9X Block II / III missile coordinator AIK-73X Block II / III, and the equipment of the information jet field pilots helmet systems targeting type HMDS. Nevertheless, we have a worthy answer to this in the form of the NEMC-T assistive target designation system from the Electroautomatics Design Bureau (St. Petersburg) and the P-2 PMD-35 super-maneuverable short-range air combat missiles, which operate according to its targeting able to handle enemy air targets even in the rear hemisphere due to the use of a much more advanced interceptor system of vector deflection. Based on the above facts, it can be concluded that General Scott Pleus is utter nonsense in attempts to unjustifiably overestimate the parameters of F-XNUMXA, which can be taken seriously either by amateurs or by victims of the United States lobby through foreign military sales.
Against the background of these interesting details, it was extremely funny to stumble upon the statement of the second “hero” of our review today - test pilot B-Flynn of F-35A, who boasts the ability to maneuver the F-35A with an overload in 9G at full combat load and fuel tanks. Of course, at near-sonic speeds such quality can play into the hands of the Lightning pilot, especially when avoiding low-maneuverable long-range air combat missiles of the P-33С / Р-37 or Iranian Fakur-90 types. However, in close combat, at speeds of 300 — 600 km / h (and even with a mass of 24 — 27 tons), such an overload will be practically unrealistic to maintain, as well as maintain a decent angular speed of turn and large angles of attack. The fault here is extremely low thrust-to-weight ratio, which will be of the order of 0,8 kgf / kg with the mass of the fighter in 24000 kg and afterburner of the engine in 19500 kgf. Against this background, our Su-35С (with 70% fuel in internal tanks and 6 air-to-air missiles RVV-SD on suspension units) has thrust-weight ratio in 1 kgf / kg, as well as full range OBT, which in total with the supporting fuselage and developed surges will not leave “Lightning” any chance.
Pleus and Flynn also decided to continue the longstanding tradition of the Western media and again focused on the “unique performance” of the F-35A ESR, as well as the air domination achieved through this. That's just all of us well remember a very entertaining flight of the first combatant "Adira» (F-35I) Israeli Air Force in 30 km from Beirut, which was equipped with Luneberg lens to hide the true radar signature of the radar detection means, attached to the Russian S-300V4 in Tartus, as well as from a sudden departure to the combat duty of the AEROU A-50U aircraft. Beirut is removed from these areas by 160 — 250 km; consequently, the Israeli “hitplanes” themselves subscribed to the fact that the ESR of the American “Lightnings” is not so small and can be quite calculated even at a distance of several hundred kilometers. For the onboard radar "Irbis-E" of the Su-35C fighter, such an object is unlikely to be difficult to find, and in the foreseeable future all maps will be revealed, which is clearly not going to please F-35 customers.
Information sources:
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/x35.html
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/aim120/aim120.shtml
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/f16cd40.html
http://forum.militaryparitet.com/viewtopic.php?id=22124
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-104.html
Let's start with a controversial reputation. It is partially related to the package of flaws in the unobtrusive F-35A fighters, represented by a rather impressive list (966 problems) of the so-called “childhood diseases”, which are quite common both for prototypes of new military equipment and for experimental-military batches of vehicles. One such “disease” can be considered the raw software for WMS, which creates errors at the time of processing target designation data from the AN / APG-81 radar into the inertial navigation system of AIM-120C-7 / 8 missiles, which ultimately does not allow the pilot F -35A simultaneously intercept several air objects due to inaccurate radio correction data. There are software deficiencies in the OMS and in relation to the air-to-ground mode. In particular, the pilot does not have the ability to view the final coordinates of the target loaded in the INS of the corrected aerial bombs equipped with JDAM kits, which, in a difficult tactical situation, can lead to an erroneous attack on a friendly base station, a mechanized unit, or other object.
The above-mentioned “childhood diseases”, as well as the X-NUMX problems of the F-964A / B / C family, documented in the reports of the United States Audit Office (GAO) and the JSF Program Office Division, do not pose a great threat to the export potential machines of types F-35A and F-35B, since they can be completely eliminated during several stages of updating the fighter software, and customers understand this perfectly.
Another thing is the "innate" design flaws of the Lightnings, which with enviable regularity put them in an extremely awkward position during training air battles with multifunctional fighters of the US Air Force and the NATO Air Force belonging to the 4 + / ++ generations. Here, only updating the software packages is indispensable, and the main PR specialists of the JSF program come in - test pilot Billy Flynn and commander of the 56 th Fighter Aviation Regiment and director of the F-35 integration department, General Scott Pleus. Skillfully hiding behind the status of the US Air Force aces pilots, they try, by giving what they wish for, to maintain the high competitiveness of the F-35A. The statements made from their lips over the past two years not only have significant discrepancies with the real state of affairs and the technical parameters of Lightning II, but also do not correspond to common sense. Thus, in the fall of 2016, General Scott Pleus noted that the F-35A operators could count on "absolutely incredible maneuverability of their machines in close combat with 4-fighter and transitional fighters". He also indicated that these subtle fighters have complete superiority over the enemy in the DVB. But the real facts suggest otherwise.
So, back in the summer of 2015, American journalist David Ex, referring to the report of an unnamed pilot of an F-35A prototype with a board number AF-2, who participated in a training melee air combat with a two-seat multi-role fighter F-16D Block 40, reported a much smaller angle Lightning reversal speeds in the entire altitude range characteristic of the “dog dump” (3 — 9 km), which led to the confident supremacy of the Falcon, which hung on the tail of the F-35A throughout the battle. The most remarkable point is that this Lightning prototype (AF-2), according to US Air Force Major-General Jeffrey Harigan, was not covered with radio absorbing materials (RPM) weighing about 200 kg, was not equipped with AIM air combat missiles -120C-7 and AIM-9X in the internal armament compartments, and also was not equipped with an AN / AAQ-37 DAS distributed-aperture electronic complex with aperture AN and AAN-6 DAS for detecting and tracking most warm-contrast targets (this is confirmed by AF photographs -2, Aiden in the American Internet).
The conclusion is the only one: AF-2 went into battle with the Falcon "lightly", with a take-off weight of the order of 17000 kg (empty weight 12800 kg + 4200 kg of fuel), which was to ensure the car a decent thrust-weight in 1,15 kgf / kg, which means , and great flight performance. Moreover, the main trump card of the F-35A was a high-performance computerized EDSU, which allowed the fighter to implement maneuvering with angles of attack of more than 60 degrees. But this did not save Lightning from defeat. The fact is that he was confronted by a slightly “weighted” two-seater F-16D “Night Falcon” Block 40, equipped with a “General Electri” F-110-GE-100 two-circuit turbojet engine, which has a 12993 kgf load. Taking into account the 40% reduction in the amount of fuel in the internal tanks spent on takeoff and arrival in the area of the training air battle with F-35A, as well as the lack of rocket armament on the suspension units, the mass of F-16D Block 40 was about 10500 kg, which ensured significantly greater thrust-to-weight ratio (1,27 kgf / kg). Moreover, at the time of the battle, the specific load on the wing of the F-35A reached 400 kg / sq. m, while in 1,66 times lighter F-16D boasted a load on the wing in 365 kg / sq.m, and this is a much more weighty argument in favor of the Falcon.
Another serious design flaw in the F-35A line can be considered the lack of developed aerodynamic flows at the wing root (like in the MiG-29 / 35 Su-30CM, F-16C / D and F / A-18E / F Super Hornet), which significantly reduces the angular speed of the turn of the machine due to the lack of the necessary lift coefficient in front of the aerodynamic focus. As you can see, in terms of “energy maneuvering”, the F-35A (even with a half-empty fuel system and 2 AIM-9X Block II / III in the internal compartments) cannot be fought with either the MiG-29C / SMT, “Mirage 2000-5 / 9” , F-16C / D and "Typhoon", neither with "Raptors" and Su-30CM, whose engines are also equipped with a thrust vector deflection system.
“Going” in a close combat at least to the level of conventional MiG-29С, Lightnings can only be achieved due to the combination of large angles of pumping of the AIM-9X Block II / III missile coordinator AIK-73X Block II / III, and the equipment of the information jet field pilots helmet systems targeting type HMDS. Nevertheless, we have a worthy answer to this in the form of the NEMC-T assistive target designation system from the Electroautomatics Design Bureau (St. Petersburg) and the P-2 PMD-35 super-maneuverable short-range air combat missiles, which operate according to its targeting able to handle enemy air targets even in the rear hemisphere due to the use of a much more advanced interceptor system of vector deflection. Based on the above facts, it can be concluded that General Scott Pleus is utter nonsense in attempts to unjustifiably overestimate the parameters of F-XNUMXA, which can be taken seriously either by amateurs or by victims of the United States lobby through foreign military sales.
Against the background of these interesting details, it was extremely funny to stumble upon the statement of the second “hero” of our review today - test pilot B-Flynn of F-35A, who boasts the ability to maneuver the F-35A with an overload in 9G at full combat load and fuel tanks. Of course, at near-sonic speeds such quality can play into the hands of the Lightning pilot, especially when avoiding low-maneuverable long-range air combat missiles of the P-33С / Р-37 or Iranian Fakur-90 types. However, in close combat, at speeds of 300 — 600 km / h (and even with a mass of 24 — 27 tons), such an overload will be practically unrealistic to maintain, as well as maintain a decent angular speed of turn and large angles of attack. The fault here is extremely low thrust-to-weight ratio, which will be of the order of 0,8 kgf / kg with the mass of the fighter in 24000 kg and afterburner of the engine in 19500 kgf. Against this background, our Su-35С (with 70% fuel in internal tanks and 6 air-to-air missiles RVV-SD on suspension units) has thrust-weight ratio in 1 kgf / kg, as well as full range OBT, which in total with the supporting fuselage and developed surges will not leave “Lightning” any chance.
Pleus and Flynn also decided to continue the longstanding tradition of the Western media and again focused on the “unique performance” of the F-35A ESR, as well as the air domination achieved through this. That's just all of us well remember a very entertaining flight of the first combatant "Adira» (F-35I) Israeli Air Force in 30 km from Beirut, which was equipped with Luneberg lens to hide the true radar signature of the radar detection means, attached to the Russian S-300V4 in Tartus, as well as from a sudden departure to the combat duty of the AEROU A-50U aircraft. Beirut is removed from these areas by 160 — 250 km; consequently, the Israeli “hitplanes” themselves subscribed to the fact that the ESR of the American “Lightnings” is not so small and can be quite calculated even at a distance of several hundred kilometers. For the onboard radar "Irbis-E" of the Su-35C fighter, such an object is unlikely to be difficult to find, and in the foreseeable future all maps will be revealed, which is clearly not going to please F-35 customers.
Information sources:
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/x35.html
http://rbase.new-factoria.ru/missile/wobb/aim120/aim120.shtml
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/f16cd40.html
http://forum.militaryparitet.com/viewtopic.php?id=22124
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-104.html
Information