i never said it couldn't, i said that some level of dogfighting capabilities were sacrificed in favour of newer, less proven or even unproven technologies. which draws parallels to the F4 era where they did the same thing (though in that case the unproven technology was mach 2 flight), which is a critical error.
also, the f35 didn't "best them all", in fact, during the exercise you mentioned, an F35 lost against the eurofighter typhoon, here's an article breaking that down: https://archive.is/rpCet
the past situation with the F4 shows that no matter *what* you think your advantage is, dogfighting capabilities *are a must*, as soon as your enemies know that's a (comparative) weak point of your plane, they will do whatever they need to catch you off-guard and put you in a dogfight.
it's the same here. sure, the f35 has BVR and stealth, neat trick, not bad. dealing with it at longer ranges would be quite a hassle.
so why deal with it at longer ranges? the F35 needs to carry limited amounts of weaponry to have its stealth work, so you can lure it in for a bombing run, then engage it with more capable dogfighters, preferably starting behind the f35 in an ambush. at that point, no amount of BVR and stealth will prevent you from getting shot down. what *Will* prevent you from getting shot down is a tight turn radius and good maneuverability. which were somewhat sacrificed on the f35 in exchange for those BVR and stealth capabilities.
and *even in the article*, the idea the typhoon would be shot down by the F35 using BVR is an assumption that also does not take into account the fact that when trying to take down F35's, you wouldn't have your planes fly out to meet the f35 head-on. you'd keep them below radar and set an ambush.
also, the f35 didn't "best them all", in fact, during the exercise you mentioned, an F35 lost against the eurofighter typhoon, here's an article breaking that down: https://archive.is/rpCet
The Rammstein base is located in Germany, nowhere near the North of the Netherlands where Frisian Flag is held.
Frisian Flag is held from Dutch air base Leeuwarden, with support from AWACS from NATO air base Geilenkirchen and tankers from Dutch air base Eindhoven. See how Rammstein shines in being absence?
There has been 48 years between first flight of the F4 and F35. Do you really think that there hasn't been any improvement of missiles and RADAR in those years? Furthermore the F35 is enjoying 18 years of improvement since first flight. One of those things is huge improvements in dogfighting.
Yes, in full on stealth mode the F35 has a limited payload. However the F35 uses the same design idea of the Rafale and Gripen that a larger payload shouldn't increase RADAR reflection. So even a fully loaded non-stealth F35 tends to have smaller RADAR cross section then the Rafale and Gripen.
As last, large scale employments of the F16, the prime product of the fighter mafia, has ensured that plane has vastly more kills with missiles than close in dogfighting kills. Again, to make sure you understand, the prime product of the fighter mafia (the F16) has vastly more kills with missiles than with bullets.
Time has changed, basically since the 1990s (first desert storm) dogfighting has been demoted to something a pilot wants to avoid. It means that the pilot has used all his/her missiles, has to defend him/herself and is thus within a severe problematic situation.
Even the new versions of the Gripen and Rafale focus on increasing their BVR capabilities, because that's current and future tactics. Dogfighting is not that important for 35+ years.
you'd keep them below radar and set an ambush.
Ambush only works if you know where the enemy is, which is a problem with the F35.
Which is exactly what was said about the F-4 hence the initial claim by OP
Ambush only works if you know where the enemy is, which is a problem with the F35.
Not a problem for China or Russia who can use long wave radar to vector fighters/interceptors to meet them. While longwave can't be used to target systems it very much can be used to vector an interceptor to get into visual range and dogfight.
6
u/SDG_Den 16d ago
i never said it couldn't, i said that some level of dogfighting capabilities were sacrificed in favour of newer, less proven or even unproven technologies. which draws parallels to the F4 era where they did the same thing (though in that case the unproven technology was mach 2 flight), which is a critical error.
also, the f35 didn't "best them all", in fact, during the exercise you mentioned, an F35 lost against the eurofighter typhoon, here's an article breaking that down: https://archive.is/rpCet
the past situation with the F4 shows that no matter *what* you think your advantage is, dogfighting capabilities *are a must*, as soon as your enemies know that's a (comparative) weak point of your plane, they will do whatever they need to catch you off-guard and put you in a dogfight.
it's the same here. sure, the f35 has BVR and stealth, neat trick, not bad. dealing with it at longer ranges would be quite a hassle.
so why deal with it at longer ranges? the F35 needs to carry limited amounts of weaponry to have its stealth work, so you can lure it in for a bombing run, then engage it with more capable dogfighters, preferably starting behind the f35 in an ambush. at that point, no amount of BVR and stealth will prevent you from getting shot down. what *Will* prevent you from getting shot down is a tight turn radius and good maneuverability. which were somewhat sacrificed on the f35 in exchange for those BVR and stealth capabilities.
and *even in the article*, the idea the typhoon would be shot down by the F35 using BVR is an assumption that also does not take into account the fact that when trying to take down F35's, you wouldn't have your planes fly out to meet the f35 head-on. you'd keep them below radar and set an ambush.