Comments by "Valen Ron" (@valenrn8657) on "Sandboxx" channel.

  1.  @cliffordnelson8454  Against F-35A Block 3F, F-16A MLU needs to be clean to make dogfight interesting.
    1
  2.  @cliffordnelson8454  >And stealth only works if you have no external loads Stealth is not a cloaking device. F-35 with external bombs still has lower RCS when compared to F-16's equivalent. Stealth(very low RCS) reduces the enemy radar's effective detection/tracking/lock-on range and enhances digital frequency memory jammers, chuff, and towed drone effectiveness. F-35 didn't skip BAE's gen 4.5 active stealth jammer and towed drone.
    1
  3.  @cliffordnelson8454  President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev has claimed that the military has destroyed at least six Armenian S-300 missile systems using Turkish and Israeli combat drones. “Modern methods of warfare are different from those of the 90s. Unmanned aircraft is an important factor in our combat capability, especially in such fortified areas…. Both Turkish Israeli drones helped us a lot. We have destroyed at least S-300 air defense systems using them,” Aliyev said during an interview with the General Director of the Interfax-Azerbaijan agency Anar Azizov. Armenian Defense Ministry also claimed that one of its jets had been shot down by a Turkish F-16C. Turkey's drones are sent to Ukraine.
    1
  4.  @cliffordnelson8454  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAYlQpfaECI THE F-35 PENETRATED RUSSIAN AIR DEFENSES UNDETECTED
    1
  5.  @cliffordnelson8454  >F-15 is aerodynamically very old F-15 still has a body lift design with high AOA (horizontal stabilizer placed after engine nozzles) when enabled by digital FCS.
    1
  6.  @cliffordnelson8454  Gripen C was beaten by China's SU-27SK in sustain turn rates. Gripen's engine is weak for the wing area and related lift drag. Gripen's Angle of Attack capability is inferior to classic Hornets, let alone F-35's. Gripen's AoA limit is about 28 degrees that's is slightly higher than F-16C. Rafale's AoA limit is 29 degrees. Classic Hornets has 45 degrees AoA. F-35A has 50 degrees AoA under software limit, without software limit, it was able to sustain 70 degrees and 110 degrees momentary AoA. F-16 Vista with TVC can sustain 90 degrees AoA. Finland purchased F-35A Block 4.
    1
  7.  @cliffordnelson8454  Clean F-16C with Glass V RAM coating is not a stealth aircraft. Clean F-16 is not a combat fighter, hence it a useless configuration.
    1
  8.  @cliffordnelson8454  AGM-158C LRASM is a stealth missile. Don't assume external missiles doesn't have very low RCS treatment.
    1
  9.  @cliffordnelson8454  >Do you know anything about stealth Yes. Stealth is not a cloaking device. Modern stealth as in Very Low Observation (VLO) rated radar cross-section (RCS) context reduces the enemy radar's effective detection/tracking/lock-on ranges. A stealth aircraft's RCS with external weapons is still lower than non-VLO aircraft with the same external weapons load.
    1
  10.  @cliffordnelson8454  Lockheed already has a J-20 like design during the JAST program. Lockheed created two near full-size prototypes from Lockheed Skunkworks vs Lockheed Fortworth. Fortworth's X35 won the internal company competition. JAST's X35 design was then reused in the JSF competition. Australia's RAAF/ Boeing Loyal Wingman design was based on McDonnell Douglas/Northrop Grumman's JAST entry. Boeing owns McDonnell Douglas IP.
    1
  11.  @cliffordnelson8454  Unlike other external missiles, AGM-158C LRASM's still follows stealth shaping design.
    1
  12.  @cliffordnelson8454  Based on your statements, you are ignorant of Lockheed Martin's projects.
    1
  13.  @cliffordnelson8454  In Thailand's Gripen C and China's SU-27SK war game, Gripen C's lower RCS was one of its advantages that was negated by J-10C (with AESA radar). For the Netherlands, F-35A Block 3F was able to use its BAE-designed active stealth (digital jammer) to cover the blue team's F16A MLUs against the red team's F-16A MLUs. Against BAE's active stealth (digital jammer), F-16C Block 40/50 level avionics are obsolete. Again, Stealth is not a cloaking device. US's stealth definition is based on the Very Low Observation (VLO) category relative to the Low Observation (LO).
    1
  14. ​ @cliffordnelson8454  >And the F-16 does not come close to planes like the Grippen with its canards. F-16A/C has 25 degrees AoA limit. Beyond 25 degrees, F-16 is out of control. Gripen has 28 degrees AoA limit. Rafale has 29 degrees AoA limit. F/A-18A Hornet has 45 degrees AoA limit. Super Hornet F/A-18E and some classic F/A-18C Hornets have higher AoA. Finish and Swiss F-18C variants can exceed the 45 degrees AoA limit. F-35A Block 3F has 50 degrees AoA software limit. Without software limit, F-35A can sustain 70 degrees AoA i.e. it can deliver most of F-16 VISTA with thrust vector control's 90 degrees sustain AoA. In terms of dogfight doctrine, Hornet operators can easily upgrade to F-35A Block 3F's "Hornet with a turbo" (Dutch claim at F-35A Block 3i, 2016).
    1
  15.  @cliffordnelson8454  F-15 with digital FCS can reach high AoA since its tail horizontal stabilizers design is similar to F/A-18's, F-22A's, and F-35A/B/C i.e. horizontal stabilizers are placed after the engine nozzles. F-15 lacking the twin canted vertical tails do not have improvements for yaw or hammerhead maneuvering. F-15 has a body lift design that was demonstrated with a single wing F-15 incident. At empty weight, F-35A's wing loading is based on F-16C Block 50's. There's a 1.5X scale design factor for F-16C to F-35A. F-16XL's larger wing degrades acceleration that is important for exiting an instantaneous turn. SU-27SK beats Gripen C in sustain turn rates despite Gripen C's low wing loading. Gripen C's weak engines don't maximize its low wing loading. Harry Hillaker's statement on low wing loading and wing size... _For example, the drag coefficient of an F-16 is about the same as that of an F-4. However, the F-16 has about one-third the drag of an F-4 in level flight. At angle of attack, it is about one-fifteenth We knew that we wanted low wing loading and high thrust loading. But we also knew that low wing loading means more weight and more drag Critics like Pierre Sprey's argument on low wing loading are insufficient. Larger wings generate higher lift drag.
    1
  16.  @cliffordnelson8454  For the Gripen design, it would need to be redesigned for large diameter engines e.g. UK BAE's Tempest with twin 43k lbf engines. UK RR has a fighter engine design that is competitive against PW F-135's thrust. Saab has joined the Team Tempest. USAF NGAD has at least twin F-135 +43k lbf class engines. Once the engine design with a practical thrust target is established, a fighter aircraft design can be designed around it.
    1
  17.  @frankrenda2519  Lockheed Martin Corporation's year 2010 stealth fiber material patent Applied NanoStructured Solutions LLC (ANS), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation . Patent Number: US20100271253 SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION In some aspects, embodiments disclosed herein relate to a radar absorbing composite that includes a (CNT)-infused fiber material disposed in at least a portion of a matrix material. The composite is capable of absorbing radar in a frequency range from between about 0.10 Megahertz to about 60 Gigahertz. The CNT-infused fiber material forms a first layer that reduces radar reflectance and a second layer that dissipates the energy of the absorbed radar. Lockheed Martin reveals F-35 Lot 4 features nanocomposite structures LM's year 2010 stealth fiber material patent is effective from 0.1 MHz to 60 Ghz which is included all VHF, L-band, S-Band, X-band, Ku-band P-Band – 30-100 cm (1-0.3 GHz) L-Band – 15-30 cm (2-1 GHz) S-Band – 8-15 cm (4-2 GHz) C-Band – 4-8 cm (8-4 GHz) X-Band – 2.5-4 cm (12-8 GHz) K-Band – Ku: 1.7-2.5 cm (18-12 GHz); Ka-Band: 0.75-1.2 cm (40-27 GHz).
    1
  18.  @frankrenda2519  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAYlQpfaECI THE F-35 PENETRATED RUSSIAN AIR DEFENSES UNDETECTED
    1
  19. ​ @frankrenda2519  >the soviet stealth book since they experimented with stealth 20 years before america Modern stealth is beyond radar refraction geometry shaping. F-35's side geometry shaping is angled and has no vertical angles. UK's WW2-era Mosquito Fighter-Bomber has lower RCS against WW2-era German radar due to mostly wooden construction.
    1
  20.  @frankrenda2519  >get your fact correct.f117 is way more stealthy than the f35 end of story FALSE, F-117A's stealth technology is obsolete.
    1
  21.  @frankrenda2519  Russia is complaining about NATO enlargement.
    1
  22.  @frankrenda2519  Stealth is not a cloaking device i.e. modern stealth only reduces enemy radar's effective detection/tracking/lock-on range.
    1
  23.  @frankrenda2519  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLUS3KlAAvg Furthermore, F-35 doesn't operate alone i.e. Ratheon's MALD and JSOW drone spamming.
    1
  24.  @frankrenda2519  The downed F-117A's EF-111A jammer support aircraft wasn't operational. Unlike F-117A, F-35 has a built digital jammer.
    1
  25. Quoting Out Of The Shadows: RNLAF experiences with the F-35A - Combat Aircraft Magazine May 2018 specifically against David Axe's leaked Y2015 report. Knight divulged a little more information about flying basic fighter manoeuvres (BFM) in an F-35. 'When our envelope was cleared to practise BFM we got the opportunity to fight some fourth-generation fighters. Remember, back the rumors were that the F-35 was a pig. The first time the opponents showed up [in the training area] they had wing tanks along with a bunch of missiles. I guess they figured that being in a dirty configuration wouldn't really matter and that they would still easily outmanoeuvre us. By the end of the week, though, they had dropped their wing tanks, transitioned to a single centerline fuel tank and were still doing everything they could not to get gunned by us. A week later they stripped the jets clean of all external stores, which made the BFM fights interesting, to say the least ---- 1. Lightest empty weight F-16A MLU air-superiority model needs to be clean (no weapons, no external tanks) to make visual range dogfight interesting against combat-loaded F-35A Block 3F. 2. Dutch has acknowledged early F-35 Block builds being beaten by F-16s with external fuel tanks which are NOT applicable for F-35A Block 3F build. * Don't use Block 2A/2B/3i numbers!*
    1
  26. Reminder, SM6 Block 1B has a hypersonic speed SM3 rocket booster.
    1
  27. If your argument is about not showing USAF's high-end capabilities, USAF shouldn't have used F-22A i.e. F-15C or F-15EX would have done the job in shooting down the balloon. It's for signal intelligence below the ionosphere.
    1
  28.  @dennisyoung7363  False narrative. F-35A Block 3F is a "Hornet with a turbo".
    1
  29.  @dennisyoung7363  AirPower Australia's advocates are idiots i.e. these fools classified F-111C as the same class as F-15. F-4 has superior dogfight capabilities when compared to F-111C!
    1
  30.  @ChucksSEADnDEAD  It's AirPower Australia...
    1
  31.  @dennisyoung7363  F-111C is not a dogfighter. Only AirPower Australia classified F-111C as being in class with the F-15.
    1
  32.  @rwj1313  In JAST program, Lockheed Fort Worth (F-16 team) designed a near full scaled X-35 while Lockheed Skunkworks designed a single-engine J-20-like fighter.
    1
  33.  @michalmik593  Maximum takeoff weight debate is not realistic for mission payloads e.g. A2A config vs A2G config. It's relatively easy for LM to add a larger wing-like on the F-35C.
    1
  34.  @TheBigExclusive  F-35A is designed with evolved Hornet's close-range dogfight capabilities. F-35 has the EO-DAS targeting system for counter stealth.
    1
  35. @The Dark Forest From flightglobal's saab-performs-gripen-high-alpha-trials-12697 tests so far have been carried out at steady-state angles of attack of up to 28 degrees. Gripen's 28 degrees AoA is slightly better than F-16's 26 degrees AoA. Rafale has 29 degrees AoA. F-15EX has the AoA upgrade for high AoA dogfight capability.
    1
  36.  @aaronmarkstaller  Hint: F-35A is about 1.5X scaled F-16C Block 50 on wing area, empty weight, and engine thrust.
    1
  37.  @halfspin8  Basic Wing loading without body and vortex lift. F-35A Empty weight: 29,300 lb Wing area: 460 ft² Wing loading: 63.04 lbs/ sq feet. F-16C Block 52 Wing area: 300 ft² Empty weight: 18,900 lb Wing loading: 63 lbs/ sq feet. F-35A's empty weight is 1.54X scaled from F-16C. F-35A's wing area is 1.53X scaled from F-16C. F-35A's 43,000 lbf thrust is 1.50X scaled from F-16C's 28,600 lbf. F-35A's 45,000 lbf thrust upgrade road map is 1.57X scaled from F-16C's 28,600 lbf. F-35A needs at least 44,330 lbs thrust to preserve 1.55X scale factor There's a near-straight 1.5X scaling between F16C to F-35A on basic wing loading, engine thrust, and empty weight. F-35A's wing area is influenced by weight growth and F-16C's empty weight wing loading target. F-35A would need a minor engine upgrade to maintain 1.55X scaling.
    1
  38.  @halfspin8  F-35A's basic design parameters are based on F-16C Block 50 with about 1.5X scaling on wing area, empty weight, and engine thrust.
    1
  39. @The Dark Forest "Gripen Wars" is useless for Frisian Flag 2012. Finland has F/A-18C with enhanced high AoA FCS against low AoA competitors such as Eurofighter (Germany, UK), Gripen C (Sweden), F-16A MLU (Norway, Belgium), and F-16C Block 52 (Poland). Frisian Flag 2012 exercises in Holland, Finnish F-18Cs gets 100 kills and 6 loses against Eurofighter (Germany, UK), Polish new F-16 and older F-16 planes (Norway, Belgium) and Gripen (Swedish) Finland's F-18C has a 16:1 kill ratio against EuroCanards and F-16s. F-35A has a Swiss F-18C 9G high AoA dogfighter with near F-16 acceleration.
    1
  40.  @halfspin8  F-35A Block 3F still has 9G.
    1
  41. @The Dark Forest F-35A has Mach 1.2 supercruise and 9G. F-35B Block 3F( 7G) is for naval-related UK Royal Navy and USMC. F-35C Block 3F (7.5G) is for US Navy with different wings, stabilator, and undercarriage.
    1
  42. @The Dark Forest Gripen E was assessed to be inferior to Swiss's 9G rated with enhanced high AoA F/A-18C variant.
    1
  43.  @halfspin8  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3b-b762QRY Super Hornet's high angle of attack with minimum turn radius advantage holding its own against F-15's high energy turn rate advantage dogfight example.
    1
  44.  @verdebusterAP  F-35 variants are only 20 to 30 percent common with each other. Lockheed effectively designed three separate fighter aircraft models under the JSF F-35 label. When compared to F-35C, F-35A is not designed to land on the aircraft carrier i.e. different internal airframes, wings, and horizontal tail.
    1
  45.  @Elthenar  F-15EX in recent war games has a mixed result.
    1
  46.  @verdebusterAP  F-35C is effectively another fighter design with 20-to-30% common with F-35A. McDuck failed to provide USN with an F-117A like solution with the A-12 Avenger II program, hence F-35C would be USN's 1st stealth fighter solution. Boeing's X32 project was worst than LM's. LM has delivered F-117A to USAF.
    1
  47.  @Elthenar  Your cited F-35 coating issue refers to USN's variant since they are different from USAF F-35A's due to USN's high salt operating environment.
    1
  48.  @Elthenar The F-14 also had the biggest and most powerful radar ever put in a fighter. F-14's radar is 36 inch or 91.44 cm. F-15 has a 95 cm diameter radar.
    1
  49.  @mikebridges20  For Rafale The DFCS is a "g" demand system with +9.0g/29° angle of attack (AoA) limit in air-to-air mode and +5.5g/20° AoA limit in both of the two air-to-ground/heavy stores modes (ST1 and ST2) to cater for forward or aft centre of gravity
    1
  50.  @mikebridges20  You stated "Tanks might be".
    1