"Opposition defends Joint Strike Fighter over simulated dogfights"

Apparently the JSF didn't do too well in simulated dogfights against future Sukhoi fighters:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24328813-31477,00.html

Sofar I couldn't find any reports this article was referring to... Anyone have some more links?

In my opinion, BVR is also a major problem for JSF against Advanced Flankers. Just look at the number and range of AA missiles, then fuel capacity. I am not sure about the speed? How fast is JSF?

Well. simulated aircombat. Can we get the report as pdf to judge this for ourselves?

Indeed, simulated aircombat, but the article in a Dutch newspaper that referred to the Australian source mentioned that these simulations were done by the Rand Corporation. With so many potential buyers for the F-35 it wouldn't make much sense to show that the plane is not up to it.

But as we both said, anyone know other sources?

Anyone remember the superb performance of the Indian Sukhois against the F-15s ? ;)

I don't!

When did this happen?! Red Flag or some similar RL dogfight exercise or just a theory based on numbers and calculations?!

Apparently the JSF didn't do too well in simulated dogfights against future Sukhoi fighters

Simulated dogfights against future Sukhoi fighters like operational Su-35 testbed or simulated against PAK-FA assumptions and expectations?!

Here's my translation of the Dutch newspaper article, as Google Translate messed it up pretty bad.

2016: Russians overwhelm JSF

 

According to an analysis of a large simulation the jet fighter that the Dutch government wants to buy is much too visible for 'the enemy'.

 

For the Dutch ministry of Defense, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is the only possible successor to the F-16. But a large scale simulation of the U.S. Department of Defense held at the end of last month, where the JSF was up against modern Russian Sukhoi jet fighters, delivers bad news for the Air Force.

 

During the simulated excersize Pacific Vision, the jets were 'clubbed to death like seals', according to a Australian customer who acquired an analysis of the simulation. This qualification is contradicted by the manufacturor Lockheed Martin, who admits that the JSF with other fighters was part of this 'wargame'.

 

At least seventy senior officials from the U.S. and Australia attended the simulation. They followed a simulated attack of China on Taiwan, which the Western Air Force and Navy had to reverse. The exercise went ahead to the year 2016. At that time both the JSF as the new Russian Sukhois will be in use, the latter in service with Russia, China and Indonesia. The JSF, according to the simulation, would be 'overwhelmed' by the larger numbers, firepower and better radar systems of the adversary. Especially the Sukhoi 35 makes short shrift to the alleged invisibility of the JSF, an important selling point of the fighter. The JSF is designed for rapid strikes outside the sight of enemy aircraft. Though according to the analysis it would also engage in direct combat, where it is 'doubly inferior' as it 'can't turn, can't climb and can't run'.

 

Initiator of the analysis, the Rand Corporation, is an influential American military think tank that is enabled by the Netherlands for a comparison of the JSF with other devices.

 

The exercise has no impact for the Netherlands, according to the Dutch Defense ministry. "The simulation focused on the establishment of a future Air Force fleet in which we do not participate. And it was a strategic analysis, not a simulation of the capabilities of the F-35 in aerial combat".

The F-35 is the F-16 replacement that is not in service yet nor are its final specs known, and the flanker is a 30 year old air superiority jet without much to tell but airshow perfomances.

I dont see where you can start making any comparisons posssible, if thats possible on 2 jets of 2 different generations.

I don't see where you can start making any comparisons posssible, if thats possible on 2 jets of 2 different generations.

This time it's not LockOn forum members making the comparisons, but the US ministry of defense. Hence, the results of this simulation would be pretty interesting. That's why I'd like to see some more information...

The US ministry of defense knows about F-35 specs better than we do, besides they made over estimations of the russian fighters before. Look at F-15, and more recently at Eurofighter. They both were designed to meet planes that didnt quite materialize and ended up without opposition. Even though many consider the Eurofighter already obsolete and over delayed the fact is it still managed to get by all this time without much to compare to, although I believe the term isnt "obsolete" for that very reason.

I never realized that the MiG-25 "didnt quite materialize" ;)

You can call it over estimation. I call it heaving absolutely no clue about the opposition. They either over or underestimate things at an alarming proportion.

The US ministry of defense knows about F-35 specs better than we do, besides they made over estimations of the russian fighters before.

I dont see where you can start making any comparisons posssible, if thats possible on 2 jets of 2 different generations.

I have more variety of books than yefins. ;)

Obviously they dont want to tell, all the want to tell us: We need more or better F-35s !

I wonder what potential buyers of the F-35 will think of this?

So far most of the buyers are participants in its development. All others will probably wait since production rate will be prioritized for member nations first anyway.

The US ministry of defense knows about F-35 specs better than we do, besides they made over estimations of the russian fighters before. Look at F-15, and more recently at Eurofighter. They both were designed to meet planes that didnt quite materialize and ended up without opposition. Even though many consider the Eurofighter already obsolete and over delayed the fact is it still managed to get by all this time without much to compare to, although I believe the term isnt "obsolete" for that very reason.

But You said Spanish EF2K was beaten by Portugese F-16, so I wouldn't call it being without opposition!

We must admit that this exercise simulated Su-35 fighters in large quantities. Here:

The JSF, according to the simulation, would be 'overwhelmed' by the larger numbers, firepower and better radar systems of the adversary.

An assumption that may be true during "cold war" hostilities but never actually happened! (xcept Israel)...

We already talked of US+NATO/Iraqi and US+NATO/Yugoslavia score in air battle. There was a single F-15C wing in Allied Force, that's...let's see...12 airframes against 4 and a half operational Fulcrums in YuAF. 80+ Yugoslav bis/MF Fishbeds never took off during AF.

So yeah, 4 JSF airframes might be clubbed to death against 30+ Su-35 but are there 30+ Su-35s in service worldwide by the 2016?!

80+ Yugoslav bis/MF Fishbeds never took off during AF.

not on air-to-air duties anyway..

Plus there's a way of starving the airframes of spare parts.

It's called 10 years of sanctions proven with Iraq, Yugoslavia and Libya example!

not on air-to-air duties anyway..

A2G?!

Kukes airport attack by a pair of G-4 is a lie, right?!

... And according to simulated A2A combat, 'modern' flankers now have a 2:1 exchange ratio against an APG-63v(1) equipped F-15 as opposed to the 6:1 the 'enjoyed' back when they weren't quite so modern. I'm sure we'll have flanker fans complaining over this one real quick now. ;)

You can set up any scenario you like in simulations; dogfights - in particular the furball that's being presented here, is the perfect way to negate stealth. It's a possible scenario, but judging the fighter's performance in a single scenario is probably not the best way to go about judging the fighter's performance overall.

I'm pretty sure a Su-35 would be quite overwhelmed by superior numebrs of F-5S' as well ;)

Not actively. They were ready and armed for A2G in case of ground war. In order to survive to see that day some were moved from airport to airport. The point is, they moved freely (but not easily) around, without ever being discovered, let alone engaged. All with the poor 50 year old RWR.

Kukes is a fairy tale btw.

^^^^

right said GGT!

Yeah, A2G equiped MiG-21 flying a NOE thru valleys is not a NATO target but a Yu AAA one.

Remember, airdefense was told to shoot anything that moves!

Before this thread turns into a fanboy orgy, did anyone read anything more about this, or is it only in the Australian and Dutch media? All I could find on google was this: http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.malaysia/browse_thread/thread/2911e8756d10682e/2bd5b0812651d5e8?lnk=raot&pli=1