Sorry, blogs that use biased or outdated information don’t interest me. There was no “mock dogfight”. It was a flight designed to see how the aircraft handled in certain flight envelopes. The F35 referenced in the article is a designated “flight sciences” aircraft with limited capability, limited systems and limited flight envelope. It is not reflective of the operational fleet in general. Tactics dictate that our aircrews have BVR, First look, First Kill capability. The F35 incorporates these when fully missionized.
In addition to being fully coated with stealth materials, the pilot would typically have sensors on board a fully capable aircraft and wouldn’t have to “turn his head” to find the “enemy”. The aircraft is essentially made “transparent” through the use of numerous sensors placed around the aircraft.
But in the interest of fairness, here’s a counter to your blogger: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/no-the-f-35-was-not-beaten-by-an-f-16/
Doc Nelson referenced in the above article is a previous active duty fighter pilot and flight test pilot in F16s, F22s and now the F35. I think his words should hold much more credence than a blogger.
Is it a 1 for 1 replacement for an A10? Hell no. I don’t believe anyone who claims to be experienced in aviation claiming such. If they do, they expose themselves as either ignorant or deceitful.
I don’t know of one person involved with the F35 who believes it is an A10 replacement. It brings first STRIKE capability, suppression of AA and once attained, then bomb trucking. More like a combination of F117 and F16 than anything else. And I’m not even getting into its avionics capabilities.
Yeah, it kills me how a bunch of Freepers hit the threads complaining about media bias then come here believing every line of crap from the ongoing smear campaign against every new weapon system since Vietnam (which is so predictable you can set your watch to it). The B-2 can’t function in the rain, the F-15 is an overpriced dog, the F-16 “electric jet’s” complex electronics are unmaintainable in a wartime footing (even though it’s been perpetually deployed for the last 25 years), the AV-8 Harrier is “The Widowmaker”, the AWACS is a piece of junk that won’t work and will be the first to die in any war, the CVN aircraft carrier was proven by World War II to be obsolete, need I go on? Then people who have actually WORKED in the aerospace industry for 20+ years try to dispel a few myths and get attacked, get called government stooges, and are accused to being in love with a piece of techno-garbage. Not too impressive, FR, I expected more from you people.
And like you, I’m not going to get into the sensors on the F-35. Just suffice to say: there are serious people in the industry that want to UPGRADE the E-8 JSTARS to sensors that the F-22 and F-35 have.
What people don’t realize is that the Air Force doesn’t “want to” retire the A-10, they were forced into making the horrible choice of dumping a new 5th generation aircraft that is coming on line or dumping the A-10. It’s impossible to make a good choice there. It’s like putting a gun to your head and telling you to decide between losing an arm and losing a leg.
The only reason that the Air Force has even entertained the notion of using an F-35 for CAS is because the alternative is to just walk away from the entire CAS mission outright. (I still hold the view that dropping JDAMs from an F-15 Strike Eagle, F-16, or B-1 is not truly CAS; it works when taking out moronic islamics that have no Air Force and can’t find reverse on a Russian tank but it’s a workaround, not a viable option against a well-equipped enemy that knows what they’re doing).