OMG! F-13s outperform F-35s!

[+SayethWhaaaa]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/22/2371412.htm

 

Um... huh?!

 

There are several questions that arise from this:

 

What's an F-13? (Czech Mig-21s??)

Are F-13s flying at Red Flag?

"F-35s were being outperformed by Russian aircraft..." so there are production model F-35s operating now?

Since when areF-35s are performing at Red Flag?

 

 

 

It's a shame, the ABC is normally a very good news agency.

[+column5]

Sounds like a load of bulls**t.

[Nesher]

should i laugh or cry? hehe :)

[+column5]

should i laugh or cry? hehe :)

 

 

You put a great pilot in a MiG-21 and a poor pilot in an F-35, and put them one-on-one, the great pilot will win every time.

 

There are pics of Supa Hornets getting simulated kills on the F-22--same thing.

[kesegy]

you can tell a lot by the f-35 pic they put in the article.

 

looks like f-35 artist impression cca. 1992

[+Dave]

That guy is s stooge. I wonder how much he is getting paid to make assumption.

[+SayethWhaaaa]

It's about 2:15 on the eastcoast of Australia right now. And Australian journos are renowned for their substance abuse problems. I'm gonna chalk it up to that.

 

 

Seriously though, if this report were true, how is it only he seems to have the reports of the F-35 getting boned during this mythical exercise? No other agencies? Denis Jensen is a well known F-22 proponent through and through. He simply does not believe that anything but the F-22 should be bought, even if it means we retire our Pigs, Hornets, Orions, Hurcules, Hawks, Globmasters, etc so we can afford at least 20 of them. I think it's just an extension of his agenda. Plus, Liberal party back benchers are a bit special in the head...

[+column5]

Plus, Liberal party back benchers are a bit special in the head...

 

Ain't that the truth...

[+SayethWhaaaa]

Ain't that the truth...

 

The Liberals are conservatives here... Has that done your head in?

[+column5]

The Liberals are conservatives here... Has that done your head in?

 

Must...resist...urge...to...say...something...political....GAAAAHHH!!!!!!!!111

[+Typhoid]

boy are we in for a world of hurt.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Junkers-f13.jpg

 

 

 

just shows yet again the intellectual bankruptcy of reporters.

[+EricJ]

Seriously... it's like the claim of Orao (Yugoslav light attack jets) are really stealth fighters and managed to make a major sneak attack during the Balkan conflict.

[+JSF_Aggie]

We had something posted about this on our homepage last Thursday.

 

The "exercise" was a constructive simulation, i.e. no pilots in the loop, all computer generated forces vs. computer generated forces, ran over & over with varying initial conditions. I think the article said it was done by a USAF lab. I don't know anything about what the simulation was trying to model, or the fidelity of the different players.

 

If the guy was really "briefed" that they were "soundly beaten" and that the sim was an accurate representation of F-35 capabilities, he's full of BS.

Edited September 22, 2008 by JSF_Aggie

[+Fubar512]

I recall a situation back in the mid-1980s, just after the film 'Top Gun" had come out on tape, and was playing on the major CATV channels. A senator from NJ had watched it, and remembered Jester's (Michael Ironside) comment regarding Top Gun using A-4's as MiG simulators, because they were "lighter and faster" then the Tomcats the students were flying.

 

Said congressmen then started in inquiry as to why billions had been spent on F-14's, when thirty year old Skyhawks were a more capable aircraft. Afterall, it said so in the movie

 

The scary thing, is that this senator is still in office....

[+JSF_Aggie]

The scary thing, is that this senator is still in office....

 

In charge of defense acquisition right?

[+SayethWhaaaa]

I think a certain Mr. Jensen was getting his arse kicked at Ace Combat and had a bit of a dummy spit. Unfortunately, this is the caliber of parliamentarians who are consulted in defense issues here, and more unfortunately, are listened to. Not to pick on his party (the former government) as the ALP has been making mistakes too, but his was the party who thought it was okay to go ahead and acquire the SuperBug without the need for any competitive tender at all. The current government continued said mistake.

 

 

Still, it's bugging me. How the hell did they come up with F-13??

[+Fubar512]

Still, it's bugging me. How the hell did they come up with F-13??

 

Political idiocy and double-speak. He probably meant "F-113E", which truly hilarious when you realize what aircraft that designation is assigned to: YF-113E

[Silverbolt]

Found this just released aircraft on the front page. Could be these.

 

http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?autoc...p;showfile=7324

 

i think he is reffering to the "Stealth" movie

[tflash]

Or read it from a better source: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...3-31477,00.html

[+suhsjake]

Speaking of MiGs, I got to meet the first test pilot of the MiG-21, Col. Georgy Mosolov.

[MaverickMike]

Wot a load of tosh!

 

The only way that would be possible, even in a realistic simulator is if there are 200 f13s against one jsf

 

then they would only kill it after it has run out missiles and cannon rounds

 

Some people will just make up stories to see what sort of effect they have. Especially in the political arena

[gbnavy61]

The Liberals are conservatives here... Has that done your head in?

 

Most awesome post in this thread.

[Canfield]

This may be a silly question, but what exactly makes everyone think the JSF is unbeatable? Stealth-technology? The various other high-tech bits?

 

I mean, it's happened before that advanced aircraft thought to be superior have come a cropper. So I have to admit that I'm not going to dismiss the article as bogus.

 

Not sure what is meant by "F-13", but I guess the MiG-21F-13 is a plausible foe in the simulation.

 

JSF_Aggie wrote:

The "exercise" was a constructive simulation, i.e. no pilots in the loop, all computer generated forces vs. computer generated forces, ran over & over with varying initial conditions. I think the article said it was done by a USAF lab. I don't know anything about what the simulation was trying to model, or the fidelity of the different players.

 

I agree with you here, Aggie. But if it was all computer controlled, the pilots would be equally skilled, thus giving a more balanced view of the aircrafts capabilities, so if the JSF lost more scenarios than the "F-13", the JSF would technically be inferior. In real life another key factor is, as you pointed out, "the man in the cockpit", then again, modern US fighters rely heavily on computers. So one could, perhaps, argue if they rely too much on it.

 

Nice discussion, chaps :) Cheerio!

[+column5]

This may be a silly question, but what exactly makes everyone think the JSF is unbeatable? Stealth-technology? The various other high-tech bits?

 

No one says its absolutely unbeatable, but you have to look at it in context: One could say that after 30 years of services the F-15 has not been shot down in A2A combat. You could say that the F-15 was unbeatable by the aircraft and pilots who faced it throughout those years.

 

Same situation with the JSF. Given the use of good tactics, a good pilot, and proper electronic support the JSF will be a very effective aircraft, unlikely to be beaten by a MiG-21 (assuming that is what the politician was referring to).

 

Its not impossible though--in one-on-one combat, all else being equal, the best pilot should prevail. Again, look at the example of Supa Hornet's getting simulated kills on F-22s. On paper it just shouldn't happen.

[+Dave]

Its not impossible though--in one-on-one combat, all else being equal, the best pilot should prevail. Again, look at the example of Supa Hornet's getting simulated kills on F-22s. On paper it just shouldn't happen.

 

And even in that case it was a better SH pilot than the Raptor pilot. Common denominator is the pilot.