I found this fascinating
1 Like
I’m getting this when loading in on ramp. All power off and I get a audible alarm until engine is started. Did you figure this out in the end?
Are there any plans to smooth the pitch up behaviour as the landing gear is raised?
This will be a controversial opinion as people here seem to complain that the F-35 is not fast enough… BUT:
Well, I think the F-35 is too fast. It feels ridiculous to fly at mach 1.4-1.45 straight and level without afterburner in the A-model. I know I wasn’t buying a study level aircraft with this one as many of the systems and specifications are classified, but I wasn’t expecting to fly an “X-Wing” either. To my knowledge, there is no evidence that F-35 can reach such speeds without afterburner.
1 Like
Yes, you’re right and I noticed that too!
I’m a F-35 fan but that is too much. There are indications that the F-35 can maintain Mach 1.2 without afterburner (with internal weapons only) but definitely not Mach 1.4-1.45 or so.
I hope that gets fixed.
Why is the F-35 slower than F22 Raptor?
1 engine vs 2
1 Like
Why does the F-35 have only one engine?
Cost, complexity, maintenance hours, problematic solution for VSTOL, aircraft size, weight, dual systems per engine. i.e a different aircraft completely. The configuration of any aircraft is driven by the requirements for it and the possible solutions, but any design choice made impacts all the other system choices.
2 Likes
The F-35 has a different purpose. It is designed to destroy enemy on the ground. It is a stealth fighter while the F-22 Raptor is designed for dog fighting. Is that somewhat accurate?
It was designed to be cheaper, multirole, and to be mass produced and sold internationally. The raptor was designed to be the most advanced air superiority plane in existence. Sort of the difference between the F-16 and F-15.
3 Likes
The F-22 and F-35 are both highly stealthy, but the F-22 was designed to do one thing supremely well, namely destroy enemy aircraft, whereas the F-35 was intended to fill a variety of roles and also to be produced in much bigger numbers.
1 Like
I hope not! The engine has some serious thrust capabilities while the plane has an excellent power to weight ratio.
It doesn’t even have to be at full mil power to break mach 1.
Also, has anyone noticed how the canopy opening from cockpit view does so at only 20fps. Why is that? I’m on Series X.
According to Wikipedia, the F-35 has a thrust to weight ratio of only 0.87-1.07 (full-50% fuel). That is even worse than a classic Hornet, which has a ratio of 0.96-1.13, and even the Hornet cannot reach Mach 1 without afterburner. The engine is powerful, but there is only one of them in the F-35. Breaking the speed of sound is not easy.
Well, hopefully they will leave it touched cos I love it as it is.
That’s an apples with oranges comparison and for sure doesn’t tell not even close the whole story.
For starters, a F-35 with 50% internal fuel still has a longer range than a F/A-18 with 100% internal fuel (and without external fuel tanks) while the F-35 with a 100% internal fuel has much, much longer range (much more than twice the range) of a F/A-18 with 100% internal fuel.
So comparing the F/A-18 with 100% internal fuel with a F-35 with also 100% internal fuel is NOT a fair comparison since the F-35 flies much, much further having of course the “fuel weight penalty” as the offset (the quantity of fuel that the F-35 carries is brutally superior to the F/A-18).
So a fairer comparison would be a F-35 with 50% fuel with a F/A-18 with 100% fuel and even in this regard the F-35 would still have a better range (although again and obviously not as big has if it was carrying 100% fuel instead). In this configuration and assuming that both aircraft are unarmed, the F/A-18 would have a thrust to weight ratio of 1.04 while the F-35A would have a thrust to weight ratio of 1.11!
And note that such comparison is with a F/A-18C with the General Electric F404-GE-402 engines which is the best Hornet variant when is comes to thrust to weight ratio.
So in “equal footing” or similar configuration the F-35 namely the F-35A, has a better thrust to weight ratio than the F/A-18.
1 Like
I know the comparison was not perfectly apples to apples and even then thrust to weight does not mean everything. Aerodynamics, drag and engine design all play a role here. I wish someday soon somebody sticks a gopro inside the cockpit and shows us how fast it can go. I’m not holding my breath as I found they are still arguing whether an F-16 can supercruise or not and what supercruise actually means now 
And if you add the other stuff such as aerodynamics and drag then the advantage will be even higher and clearer for the F-35 since it can carry weapons internally and as such with no drag penalties while all 4th gen fighter aircraft like for example the F/A-18 will always have to carry weapons and external fuel tanks hanging on the wings which adds tremendous drag which has a tremendous negative impact on aerodynamics.
So basically and above I was comparing a combat ready F-35 with a clean F/A-18, the later of which will never perform any missions configured like this.
When should we turn on the formation lights?
when you’re flying in formation with other planes?
2 Likes