Comments on: Why the Super Bug is no substitute for the F-35: a technical comparison

By: zbigniewmazurak

zbigniewmazurak — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 16:16:09 +0000

I’ll add the missing data soon.

By: picard578

picard578 — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 14:29:10 +0000

Point isn’t in Super Bug being superior or inferior; if you have decided to make a table, it should not be incomplete.

By: zbigniewmazurak

zbigniewmazurak — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:40:00 +0000

Of course they’re not going to dogfight anymore. And the fact is that, with an A2A loadout, the Super Bug is STILL decisively inferior to the F-35.

By: picard578

picard578 — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 16:56:24 +0000

Then you should throw in “with AtA loadout” values; aircraft with no missiles and no bullets isn’t going to dogfight anyone.

By: zbigniewmazurak

zbigniewmazurak — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 11:45:09 +0000

This is true for these F-35 variants with a full combat load. The Super Bug, even without any combat load, without any external stores, can’t do more than 7.6Gs. WITH external stores, it performs even worse.

By: picard578

picard578 — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 22:18:29 +0000

F-35s G load is 7 for B, 7,5 for C and 9 for A.
http://f-35.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/F-35-Fast-Facts-November-11-2012.pdf

By: zbigniewmazurak

zbigniewmazurak — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 19:09:30 +0000

Actually, I DO bother to do my own calculations, and no, the Super Bug cannot do 9 or 10Gs, even in an emergency, even in a clean configuration.

By: picard578

picard578 — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:32:37 +0000

You don’t even bother to do your own calculations, obviously. And yes, I know about G limits, but, AFAIK, 7,6 G is operational limit, so Super Bug should be able to pull cca 9-10 G in override at the expense of airframe life. Of course, Typhoon or Rafale would be far better choice than Super Bug.

By: zbigniewmazurak

zbigniewmazurak — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:45:08 +0000

“And my calculations, based on weight, fuel capacity and missile weight, clearly show that SuperBug’s wing loading is 458,5 kg/m2 loaded AtA and 402,6 kg/m2 with 50% fuel, 2 Sidewinder and 4 AMRAAM.”

And in this case, your calculations are wrong. It’s as simple as that. The Super Bug is not, and will never be, even nearly as agile as the F-35. Here’s a clue for you: the Super Bug, even flown clean, can’t do more than 7.6Gs. The F-35 can pull 9Gs with a full combat load.

By: picard578

picard578 — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:22:29 +0000

You can’t take Wikipedia for granted without checking figures and claims yourself. And my calculations, based on weight, fuel capacity and missile weight, clearly show that SuperBug’s wing loading is 458,5 kg/m2 loaded AtA and 402,6 kg/m2 with 50% fuel, 2 Sidewinder and 4 AMRAAM.

It wouldn’t be first time Wikipedia editors manipulated numbers either. Wikipedia is hardly a reliable and neutral source, so you have to be careful what you take from it.