Test Pilot Admits the F-35 Can’t Dogfight

War is Boring ^ | 06/29/2015 | DAVID AXE

[sukhoi-30mki]

[G Larry]

Never let em get that close!

[CodeToad]

Any idiot can look at the Pug and see it is not a maneuverable platform.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

A trillion dollar hangar queen. F-22 has it beat hands down.

[WayneS]

Did they switch pilots and repeat the test?

It is possible the F16 jockey is just a better pilot.

[Rennes Templar]

When I first saw the half-miilion dollar bulky helmet I questioned whether it would give advantage.

[grobdriver]

It is possible the F16 jockey is just a better pilot.

My first thought too.

If they get the same result from multiple pilots, there may be something here.

One guy, though, could be said to be sour grapes at being bested in the air by a better stick.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

Don't know anything about flying, so obviously have no idea whether this is a real problem or not, but as a layman this doesn't seem like a good thing after spending near a trillion dollars. Seems like the only thing that sets the F35 apart is stealth, and this makes me wonder what would happen if the enemy finds the means to overcome the stealth?

I also wonder if things might not dramatically change anyway, such that we have central ‘command’ aircraft from which multiple unmanned drones are launched and controlled in combat. Have no idea, but hope that the people making the military plans for the future do.

[headstamp 2]

“at a total program cost of more than a trillion dollars”

This is it in a nutshell. The program inertia is too great to pull the plug on this thing. Also, too many clients/builders involved.

[USNBandit]

Except when it comes to the F-35s primary mission, which is dropping air to ground ordnance.

[bigdaddy45]

A trillion dollars. For an airplane. Just absorb that figure for a moment. And tell me again why the Pentagon needs even MORE of our money to waste?

[Sir Napsalot]

But to a non-expert in such matters, it seemed too pricey.

[NorthMountain]

A trillion dollars.

Is that:

1) the total cost for designing and building the entire proposed F-35 fleet?

2) the prorated cost to field one of the F-35 aircraft?

3) the factory production cost of a single F-35 aircraft?

[glorgau]

I see no problems that another 20 years of development and $2 trillion can’t fix.

[WayneS]

You are correct about the aircraft’s primary mission.

That being the case, though, doesn’t logic dictate that it be classified as an [A]ttack plane or a [B]omber instead of as a [F]ighter?

[Red Badger]

The F-35 was flying “clean,” with no weapons in its bomb bay or under its wings and fuselage. The F-16, by contrast, was hauling two bulky underwing drop tanks, putting the older jet at an aerodynamic disadvantage.

Duck. Sitting...........................

[Red Badger]

To big to fail?......................

[oldplayer]

This is a surprise to nobody. Their missions are different and so are their abilities. The F-16 (even the 2-place version) is one of the most agile fighters around. The original 1-seater was designed specifically to be an inexpensive dog-fighter and it turned out to be nearly as good as the twin-engine F-15 (which was our number one air superiority weapon).

The F-35, designed by Congress and by DOD committees, was to be a slow, stealthy, more capable ordinance platform to replace the incredible F-117 (Incredible because it flew at all).

Oldplayer

Oldplayer

[Jonty30]

Basic physics. Wide jets are not maneuverable. There is going to be a lot of air resistance when the plain changes direction.

[minnesota_bound]

I am sure our allies are just thrilled about getting these aircraft. The British have a new carrier and these aircraft will be on it....