Aerospace Daily on the F-35A at Red Flag

"The U.S. Air Force’s F-35A made its debut at the toughest Red Flag yet, and not only dominated the air space but made the legacy aircraft in the force package even deadlier, according to pilots.
The F-35’s participation in the Air Force’s capstone training event at Nellis AFB, Nevada, which is known as one of the world’s most realistic and challenging air-to-air combat exercises, marked a crucial test for the fifth-generation fighter. This year, pilots went up against the most aggressive threat laydown ever seen at a Red Flag: more surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), more jamming, and more red air, said Lt. Col. George Watkins, 34th Fighter Squadron commander.
The exercise began Jan. 23 and will continue until Feb. 10.
Despite the stepped up threat, pilots lost only one F-35 to every 15 aggressors killed in action—an impressive kill ratio for an aircraft that is not designed as an air-to-air fighter.
Where before an F-16 would not even see the advanced threat on the battlespace—the blue forces would take them out ahead of time with standoff weapons—now with the F-35 added to the mix, pilots can detect and pinpoint multiple threats at once, Watkins said.
Faced with three or four different advanced SAMs in one scenario, F-35 pilots gather and fuse data from a multitude of sources. Then the stealthy aircraft slips undetected within range and takes out the threat. If the F-35 runs out of munitions, F-22 and fourth-generation pilots still want the aircraft to stay in the vicinity, vacuuming up targeting information and transferring it to the rest of the force.
“Before where we would have one advanced threat and we would put everything we had—F-16s, F-15s, F-18s, missiles, we would shoot everything we had at that one threat just to take it out—now we are seeing three or four of those threats at a time,” Watkins said. “Just between [the F-35] and the [F-22] Raptor we are able to geo-locate them, precision-target them, and then we are able to bring the fourth-generation assets in behind us after those threats are neutralized. It’s a whole different world out there for us now.”
The F-35 and the air superiority F-22, in particular, make a deadly team, the pilots said.
“When you pair the F-22and the F-35 like together with the fourth-generation strikers behind us, we’re really able to dominate the air space over the Nellis test and training range,” Watkins said."

 

Cool

 

Very nice to see this coming together.

And just for fun, it would be interesting to find out what kind of aircraft were part of the "red air".

 

Typically F-16s...

 

No Flankers and Fulcrums?

 

Just keep the A-10 around for the dirty work. Update the airplane with bolt on ECM gear and provide a SLEP. The A-10 can be quite useful in a conflict, with less than near-peer adversaries. As a last resort, please kindly give it to the ARMY - HOOORAAAAH .

____________________________

I converse with a few retired fighter pilots. Below is a recent conversation I cut and pasted.

____________________________

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I actually knew and flew with some of those gents.

Them was the days!

Schmied

From: Fox2
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 1:02 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Fly Off.......

Don't recall the participants, exactly...Fiorelli, maybe Rich Rose, Cass? Fosnot? McCormick? Cass might know. I think I was duking-it out with Brooks at the time and was grounded.

Harv

In a message dated 1/27/2017 07:44:18 Pacific Standard Time, writes:
Harv,
I remember the fly-off. Who was on the 162nd team? I know Ben Briggs was (bunt bombing expert). Who else was? Wess? Harv? Anyone know?
Jackal


On 1/26/2017 11:02 PM, Fox2 wrote:


From:
To:
Sent: 1/26/2017 17:57:47 Pacific Standard Time
Subj: Re: Fly Off.......

You're absolutely right…we should have learned that with the F-111…then we were strapped with the F-4 because the SAC run AF at that time paid no attention to the Tactical capabilities of our AF. Unfortunately, I see no end to ****-ups in the furure!!

Tiny

On Jan 26, 2017, at 5:25 PM, Fox2.com wrote:

There's no such thing as an "all purpose cure". How many ****-ups costing billions do we have to experience to learn that?

Harv

In a message dated 1/26/2017 15:21:17 Pacific Standard Time, Tiny wrote:
Harv,

As a follow-up to my previous comments, I just go off of the phone with an F-35 contact. To aim the gun the helmet sight is used…I would like to get some accurate OT&E on how well this works. Also, the 25MM is reportedly still the gun that is in the jet. I’m late for the bar…

LT

On Jan 26, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Tiny wrote:

Harv,

This is an interesting commentary from Shep. It is getting harder to defend the F-35. We spent ?$M trying to develop a 25MM gun…now we’re back to the 20MM! I almost got fired for saying you needed a HUD…I have no idea how they plan to aim the gun. The 2/3 degree up sight line has unique problems for strafing…The Eagle I think is prohibited from staffing because their gun is foresighted 3 degrees up. I do not see the F-35 used in the CAS role as we know it.

I’m heading to the bar…

Tiny

On Jan 26, 2017, at 1:40 PM, Fox2l.com wrote:

Tiny...interesting commentary from Shep.

Harv

From:
To:
CC:
Sent: 1/26/2017 11:23:45 Pacific Standard Time
Subj: Re: Fly Off.......

This is so stupid it is beyond comprehension - the F-35 does not even have a reticle yet that they can use to aim a gun - two totally different airplanes designed ground up to do something the other cannot do - only someone as dumb as Congress could think up such a scenario - by the way, I just got back from Alaska visiting the 90th FS in F-22s - they just got back from the ISIS fight and "dropping" on about 80% of their missions. Right now they can carry two 1,000# JDAMs or two 1,000% LGBs or four SDBs internal along with a mix of AMRAAMs and AIM-9Xs. I asked them if they did any CAS - yes, but cannot use air-to-air gun, a Vulcan 20mm canon with 480 rounds, effectively as it is canted up 2/3 degrees - some smart captain will probably figure out a way so they can get down in the weeds and get shot down - impressive new precision CAS stand-off ordnance is being contemplated/designed (not sure if procured) - some of it can even be delivered by AC-130 Special ops Gunships linked to airborne ISR UCAVs or ones they launch themselves (will enable them to operate standoff even in daytime in semi-permissive environ) - looking like no more manly wars - may have to just develop "Fear Medals" - Shep

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 26, 2017, at 10:47 AM, Tim wrote:

As reported by Fighter-Sweep. If this actually happens, it will be interesting to watch, all the while wondering how
much institutional bias is written into the test criteria…

In the A-7 vs A-10 fly off, we used to joke how the A-7 was going to fail in all the test criteria:

-which jet has more engines?
-which jet is slower?
-which jet has the BFG? 30mm vs the tiny 20mm…
-which jet is newer
-which jet does the AF really want?

The same might go for the A-10 vs F-35:

-which jet has fewer engines to maintain?
-which jet is faster?
-which jet has a newer gun?
-which jet is newer?
-which jet does the AF really want?

In my mind, get/maintain Air Superiority with the F-16/22/35, let the A-10 get in and do what only they can really do….

Simple solutions for complex problems….. although it never really works that way…..

https://fightersweep.com/6879/10-versus-f-35-aircraft-will-win-shootout/

tim

 

So, with a kill ratio like that, I'm guessing you wouldn't want to be the F-35 guy who got shot down?

 

Don- The have never lost an F-22 in any engagements during exercises, but sometimes blind luck is just not on your (F-35A pilot's) side. Plus the aggressor pilots are very, very good. The F-22 outperforms the F-16 in all measures, the F-35 does not.

 

There was one (that many) in 2015 but it was basically a gang rape by 8 vipers on one raptor. The F-22 is fantastic.

 

Which NATO country's participate this year ?

 

Will- Had not heard about that one, but entirely believable. Every once in a while, someone will paint themselves into a corner. Plus, I was amazed at the difference in pilot ability when I flew 4 sorties with the 36FW at Bitburg. Some really, really good, and some pretty ordinary. Assume the same is true at F-22A units.

 

I was at Nellis the middle of January.

I noticed RAF units.

Brazil had some jets on the ramp !

 

Maybe I dont understand whats being said. But it seems to me from the articles posted here that the F35s ability in these tests is very much related to the systems on the plane and little to do with the airframe istelf. Therefore would a F15 with the same systems not be close to as effective.

If stealth is a factor surely F22s with F35 systems would have saved a boatload of time money and effort for something even more effective.

 

Stealth will only be effective in a conflict with a near-peer adversary for another ten-fifteen years.



A.F. does not want to obtain any more new-build non-stealth combat aircraft. Additional F-22's should have been purchased. Unfortunately, the F-22 train has already departed the station. It is not economically feasible to re-open the F-22 production line.

It would take years to put the airplane back into production. The small niche subcontractors have moved on. No other 'pet' airplane is available. They do not want an improved new-build F-15 - the Silent Eagle.

 

Sorry, do not believe stealth will be ineffective in that timeframe and there is little data to back it up. Low frequency radars will not likely be fitted to fighters in that timeframe. IRST has limits, especially against subdued IR signature aircraft.

No, F-15s already have very effective systems, just not as much sensor fusion as the F-22 and F-35 and radars that are not as difficult to sense. The F-15 and F-16 do go through near continuous upgrades, however. The big trouble for fourth generation aircraft against fifth generation aircraft is they never see the fifth generation aircraft until they are dead. One F-22 pilot said it was almost a waste of missiles when he can so easily sneak up on fourth generation aircraft and take them out with his gun. He was just kidding, of course, but the capability is there.

 

It has been said that you cannot redesign an existing aircraft to be anywhere near truly stealthy. Stealth has to be built into the design from the start.

 

We did it with an F-111 and Boeing did it with the F-15SE Silent Eagle, but you are correct. You can lower the radar cross section, but never approach the low observables of an aircraft where LO was an ingoing argument. The F-15SE was optimized against X-band, air-to-air radars, had low enough technology content it could have been exported, but had shorter range than the standard F-15E and its internal payload (conformal tanks replaced with weapons bays) was much smaller than the F-15E's external payload.

 

Stealth was also sprinkled on to the F-18E/F.


I would 'guess' in a low-intensity conflict they would bolt-on weapons racks to the F-15SE and increase both the ordnance and missiles. No doubt, in a low intensity conflict they will do the same with the F-22 and F-35.

Either way, the F-15SE is much better looking than the F-35.

 

Just be glad they didn't choose the Boeing X-32 over the F-35.

The Pontiac Aztek of aircraft.

 

Agreed

 

What is not usually understood is that we were using some low observables technology in the 1960s. Both the SR-71 and the F-111 used RAM (radar absorbing material) in various locations. On the F-111 it was in the intakes, the biggest source of radar return head-on. By end of life, there were aluminum strips across a good part of that RAM to make sure it did not delaminate and go down the intakes.