Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LC0112G]

There is already 7 other female pilots in the military, with some more with the airlines

Seeing that many brave ATA WOMEN flew WW2 warplanes to their new bases in the UK, and even more than that, a female force of Soviet Union pilots, of the 588th Night Bomber Regiment, known as Nachthexen, or “night witches", due to the strange noise their early bombers made, dropping 23,000 tons of bombs on Nazi targets during 30,000 missions during WW2, it should not be questioned about women flying aircraft into battle.

So what happened to the first female Red Arrows pilot 

Like with many male RAF pilots, she could not cut it at that level in air display mode, in tight formations, for entertainment purposes only.  Come the need to enter into full combat women will perform or not to the same degree as male pilots will perform or not.  That is just a fact of life with flying regardless of gender

Trust me - that's not what happened. The "tight formations for entertainment purposes" that got her sacked didn't occur whilst she was in the air - allegedly. That is just a fact of life with mixed gender. 

[Nick W]

Also they quoted a top speed of 1200 mph for the F35, but the old English Electric Lightening could at least do 1300 mph (apparently, but subject to it's "secret" classification). The fastest Mk24 Spitfire in level flight could do 454 mph.  So is that quoted "1200 mph" for the new F35 Lightening purely for the public's ears and is in actual fact a classified far higher speed than that?  For £100 million, in 2019, I would expect the F35 to go a lot faster than the old Lightening!

 

you're assuming that the Lightning could do something useful with that speed. What actually happened was it took off, accelerated to height and max speed, then was throttled back and the pilot started praying that he had enough fuel left to make it to a runway. Fuel is heavy and bulky, so it couldn't carry much. The same applied to armaments.


They were a plane with impressive numbers, but not much real use.


Modern aircraft use their supersonic capabilities in the same way; they're stationed 'safely' some distance from battlefields, and use the speed to cover the distance quickly. Hopefully they have enough fuel to do something useful and get clear once they've done it. A fighter's role is to keep airspace clear of enemy weapons so the useful aircraft, which tend to be slow or delicate like helicopters or transports, can do their work. Then they're put to work shooting armour or bombing targets. Which is why they tend to be designed as fighter/bombers rather than just fighters.


Supersonic is one of the less important requirements.

[Lizzie Zoom]

How about the speed question?

The top speed will be classified, but it just doesn't matter for the role the F-35 plays. It's fast enough for what it needs to do. I would be amazed if its anywhere close to being as quick as a clean Lightning. Why do you think it matters?

And even if it did matter, you'd have to specify at what altitude. F-15 is/was Mach 2.5 at about 40K feet, but not once you put external weapons and tanks on it.  Concorde was Mach 2 at 50-60K feet. SR71 saw Mach 3+ at 80K feet. The upper atmosphere isn't where you're going to find F-35's operating.

None of that is relevant to a Strike Fighter which typically operates 10K feet and below. There isn't much that is Mach 2 below 10K feet, and certainly not once you hang bombs, missiles and fuel tanks on it. F-111 was supposedly Mach 1.2 at treetop level and was generally considered the fastest down in the weeds.

At 10K feet I'd expect the F35 to hold it's own against any comparible aircraft. Remember, everything is internal on an F-35, whereas weapons are generally external on everything else. The Lightning won't be doing Mach 2 at 10K feet carrying two 1000lb bombs for 500 miles :-)

Thanks for that thorough explanation 

[Lizzie Zoom]

Also they quoted a top speed of 1200 mph for the F35, but the old English Electric Lightening could at least do 1300 mph (apparently, but subject to it's "secret" classification). The fastest Mk24 Spitfire in level flight could do 454 mph.  So is that quoted "1200 mph" for the new F35 Lightening purely for the public's ears and is in actual fact a classified far higher speed than that?  For £100 million, in 2019, I would expect the F35 to go a lot faster than the old Lightening!

 

you're assuming that the Lightning could do something useful with that speed. What actually happened was it took off, accelerated to height and max speed, then was throttled back and the pilot started praying that he had enough fuel left to make it to a runway. Fuel is heavy and bulky, so it couldn't carry much. The same applied to armaments.


They were a plane with impressive numbers, but not much real use.


Modern aircraft use their supersonic capabilities in the same way; they're stationed 'safely' some distance from battlefields, and use the speed to cover the distance quickly. Hopefully they have enough fuel to do something useful and get clear once they've done it. A fighter's role is to keep airspace clear of enemy weapons so the useful aircraft, which tend to be slow or delicate like helicopters or transports, can do their work. Then they're put to work shooting armour or bombing targets. Which is why they tend to be designed as fighter/bombers rather than just fighters.


Supersonic is one of the less important requirements.

If I remember correctly, one of their key roles was scrambling, taking off and climbing as fast as possible to intercept Soviet Union Great Bear bombers before they became a threat in UK airspace.  Later it was a case of perhaps doing that against incoming missles. In fact they were used in exactly the same way as Fighter Command intercepted the Luftwaffe bombers and accompanying fighters, then later the V1's. They had no chance of course against the V2's!

The English Electric Lightening I believed was designed and built for that interception role. The new F35 Lightenings surely could be needed still to intercept incoming threats to the UK, so surely maximum speed is still important?

The enemy - Russia - will have to use fast jets in any attack on British military and civilian targets, so are not our F35's not to be used to eliminate those threats, as fighters main role has always been?

 

[Nick W]

If I remember correctly, one of their key roles was scrambling, taking off and climbing as fast as possible to intercept Soviet Union Great Bear bombers before they became a threat in UK airspace.  Later it was a case of perhaps doing that against incoming missles. In fact they were used in exactly the same way as Fighter Command intercepted the Luftwaffe bombers and accompanying fighters, then later the V1's. They had no chance of course against the V2's!

The English Electric Lightening I believed was designed and built for that interception role. The new F35 Lightenings surely could be needed still to intercept incoming threats to the UK, so surely maximum speed is still important?

Original Lightning had 150mile operational radius. 150miles!! That's not intercepting before they're a threat, but absolute last ditch, cross your fingers and pray it's not as bad as it looks. Top speed of these things is like owning a 200mph road car; is it a 2 seater that's too long, low and wide to be of any real use, or a 5 seater Bentley saloon that does it effortlessly and is still a usable saloon at 30mph in traffic?

[Lizzie Zoom]

If I remember correctly, one of their key roles was scrambling, taking off and climbing as fast as possible to intercept Soviet Union Great Bear bombers before they became a threat in UK airspace.  Later it was a case of perhaps doing that against incoming missles. In fact they were used in exactly the same way as Fighter Command intercepted the Luftwaffe bombers and accompanying fighters, then later the V1's. They had no chance of course against the V2's!

The English Electric Lightening I believed was designed and built for that interception role. The new F35 Lightenings surely could be needed still to intercept incoming threats to the UK, so surely maximum speed is still important?

Original Lightning had 150mile operational radius. 150miles!! That's not intercepting before they're a threat, but absolute last ditch, cross your fingers and pray it's not as bad as it looks. Top speed of these things is like owning a 200mph road car; is it a 2 seater that's too long, low and wide to be of any real use, or a 5 seater Bentley saloon that does it effortlessly and is still a usable saloon at 30mph in traffic?

The Lightenings that were intercepting the Soviet bombers, the F.6, had a range of 850 miles. They could also carry an additional 260 gallons of fuel in each of two wing drop tanks. So, yes, they could effectively do what was necessary, to intercept, just like the Spitfires did before

[Doctor Gollum]

Not at Mach 2 though...

[Lizzie Zoom]

Not at Mach 2 though...

But once they had accerlarated to intercept the bombers they DID do what was intended; get close and personal to the Russians

[LC0112G]

If I remember correctly, one of their key roles was scrambling, taking off and climbing as fast as possible to intercept Soviet Union Great Bear bombers before they became a threat in UK airspace.  Later it was a case of perhaps doing that against incoming missles. In fact they were used in exactly the same way as Fighter Command intercepted the Luftwaffe bombers and accompanying fighters, then later the V1's. They had no chance of course against the V2's!

It's called QRA - Quick Reaction Alert. The UK maintains 4 aircraft at (IIRC) 15 minuite notice to launch 24/7. Two at Coningsby (Lincolnshire) and two at Lossiemouth (Scotland). I think there arwe another 4 on 30 minute notice. They are all Typhoon FGR4 aircraft armed with 4 short and 4 long range anti aircraft missiles. They regularly launch to intercept Russian Bear and Blackjack aircraft in the north sea. Dunno what the stats are - probably once a month or so. They also launch whenever anything unusal happens on a civilian flight - like rowdy Hen/Stag Night people causing aggro on a Ryanair to Ibiza. To support them there is also a Voyager Tanker aircraft that launches from Brize Norton. This allows them to stay airborne for many hours if required - I think the scramble from Lossie last month was something like 8 hours.

We won't use F-35 for QRA. The Typhoon is better suited. Other nations (Netherlands, Belgium, Norway etc) will use F-35, simply because they are all one type airforces. The F-35 is Ok for QRA, but nowhere near the best. Typhoon, F-15 and F-22 are all better suited. But if all you've got is F-35, then that's what you use.

The English Electric Lightening I believed was designed and built for that interception role. The new F35 Lightenings surely could be needed still to intercept incoming threats to the UK, so surely maximum speed is still important?

We could, but we've got 120 ish Typhoons versus 15 F-35's at present. F-35's are best suited to striking/bombing hostile targets with a secondary air defence capability. Typhoon is the other way around - best suited for air defence with a reasonable strike (bomber) capability

The enemy - Russia - will have to use fast jets in any attack on British military and civilian targets, so are not our F35's not to be used to eliminate those threats, as fighters main role has always been?

 

UK air defences act as an integrated network with other NATO allies. Russian bombers have to go round the north of Norway, and then down the north sea to get to us. They are typically first detected/intercepted by Norwegian radar/jets, or occasionally NATO allies based in Iceland. Once they get closer to UK airspace, UK QRA launches. UK QRA does not cover Eire, so if the Russians go off into the Atlantic the UK jets return home.

International airspace starts 12nm miles out to sea. Therefore the Russians can quite legally fly all the way down the north sea almost as far as Belgium. They can also come up the English channel as far as the Isle of Wight or even up the Bristol channel. If they suddenly got aggressive from 12 miles off the coast, then we're bu99ered.

[Lizzie Zoom]

If I remember correctly, one of their key roles was scrambling, taking off and climbing as fast as possible to intercept Soviet Union Great Bear bombers before they became a threat in UK airspace.  Later it was a case of perhaps doing that against incoming missles. In fact they were used in exactly the same way as Fighter Command intercepted the Luftwaffe bombers and accompanying fighters, then later the V1's. They had no chance of course against the V2's!

It's called QRA - Quick Reaction Alert. The UK maintains 4 aircraft at (IIRC) 15 minuite notice to launch 24/7. Two at Coningsby (Lincolnshire) and two at Lossiemouth (Scotland). I think there arwe another 4 on 30 minute notice. They are all Typhoon FGR4 aircraft armed with 4 short and 4 long range anti aircraft missiles. They regularly launch to intercept Russian Bear and Blackjack aircraft in the north sea. Dunno what the stats are - probably once a month or so. They also launch whenever anything unusal happens on a civilian flight - like rowdy Hen/Stag Night people causing aggro on a Ryanair to Ibiza. To support them there is also a Voyager Tanker aircraft that launches from Brize Norton. This allows them to stay airborne for many hours if required - I think the scramble from Lossie last month was something like 8 hours.

We won't use F-35 for QRA. The Typhoon is better suited. Other nations (Netherlands, Belgium, Norway etc) will use F-35, simply because they are all one type airforces. The F-35 is Ok for QRA, but nowhere near the best. Typhoon, F-15 and F-22 are all better suited. But if all you've got is F-35, then that's what you use.

The English Electric Lightening I believed was designed and built for that interception role. The new F35 Lightenings surely could be needed still to intercept incoming threats to the UK, so surely maximum speed is still important?

We could, but we've got 120 ish Typhoons versus 15 F-35's at present. F-35's are best suited to striking/bombing hostile targets with a secondary air defence capability. Typhoon is the other way around - best suited for air defence with a reasonable strike (bomber) capability

The enemy - Russia - will have to use fast jets in any attack on British military and civilian targets, so are not our F35's not to be used to eliminate those threats, as fighters main role has always been?

 

UK air defences act as an integrated network with other NATO allies. Russian bombers have to go round the north of Norway, and then down the north sea to get to us. They are typically first detected/intercepted by Norwegian radar/jets, or occasionally NATO allies based in Iceland. Once they get closer to UK airspace, UK QRA launches. UK QRA does not cover Eire, so if the Russians go off into the Atlantic the UK jets return home.

International airspace starts 12nm miles out to sea. Therefore the Russians can quite legally fly all the way down the north sea almost as far as Belgium. They can also come up the English channel as far as the Isle of Wight or even up the Bristol channel. If they suddenly got aggressive from 12 miles off the coast, then we're bu99ered.

Thanks for that comprehensive explanation LC0112G

You certainly know what you are talking about

[LC0112G]

You certainly know what you are talking about

Amaizing what you pick up after 40 years of global plane spotting. I'm off to the USA to visit 3 F-35 bases over there next month (though not the one in the TV program) so I'll ask if the bin lid has any aero advantages just for you  .

[Rods2]

What is more important if you have to 'mix it' with an enemy interceptor is thrust to weight ratio, turn & climb rates & especially thrust to drag when maneuvering as this will bleed off speed in a dogfight and these normally occur at subsonic speeds. What you don't want to do is run out of energy by being low & slow, so you can be picked off. Top speed is only a major issue when you have to 'bug out' & then once beyond visual range stealth will play a very important part in the F35.

Super cruise massively increases an aircraft's supersonic range as when you have to use the afterburner to go supersonic you get through fuel so fast you can only use it for minutes on a normal mission profile.

Pilot overload can be an issue in a single seat combat aircraft & the F35 sensors & systems are second to none in terms of pilot situation awareness & minimising workload which will allow it to win in many situations.

[LC0112G]

What is more important if you have to 'mix it' with an enemy interceptor is thrust to weight ratio, turn & climb rates & especially thrust to drag when maneuvering as this will bleed off speed in a dogfight and these normally occur at subsonic speeds. What you don't want to do is run out of energy by being low & slow, so you can be picked off. Top speed is only a major issue when you have to 'bug out' & then once beyond visual range stealth will play a very important part in the F35.

None of the current generation of fighters expect to get into a dog fight. Not saying it can't happen, but the idea is that you engage the target at well beyond visual range, and the first the target knows about your presence is when your missile goes up their tail pipe. F-35B doesn't even have a gun and the RAF Typhoons have the gun port blanked off (it was too expensive to remove the gun itself because it upsets the balance of the aircraft). Modern short range missiles have high offset bore capability, and both the Aim9X (latest gen sidewinder) and the ASRAAM can be targeted at an aircraft behind the launch plane.

The F-35B isn't intended to be a 'fighter' - its a 'bomber'. In stealth mode it can only carry 2 ASRAAM's, plus 2 1000lb bombs internally. Longer range AIM120 AMRAAM's have to be carried on wing mounted pylons, which means the aircrafts radar signature increases massively - it's no longer stealth. AIM120's don't fit in the F-35B's weapons bay, and the funding to make them fit has been cut. The ASRAAM's are only there to engage targets of opportunity - basically things that get in the way. F35B would rather evade/run away from a threat than try to engage it. In the past both Tornado GR1/4 and Nimrod have carried sidewinders, but neither had any pretences at being an air to air fighter.

[Lizzie Zoom]

You certainly know what you are talking about

Amaizing what you pick up after 40 years of global plane spotting. I'm off to the USA to visit 3 F-35 bases over there next month (though not the one in the TV program) so I'll ask if the bin lid has any aero advantages just for you  .

What a lucky sod you are!

Yes, I'd love to know more about that device, that I note they also use in standard forward flight after they have taken off,  Seems to go against all the principles of a streamlined plane that has nothing sticking out to disrupt the air stream   But as you have pointed out the vertical take off mechanism does far more than what is initially obvious, and was relevant to the old Harrier

[Shackeng]

I watched it
I was expecting more "equality" speil for the girl

It is recognised in 2019 that women can do all these jobs, no more or less than a man can.  So there is no need to "hammer" the equality issue anymore thank goodness

Let's see how far she goes. 

There is already 7 other female pilots in the military, with some many more with the airlines

Seeing that many brave ATA WOMEN flew WW2 warplanes to their new bases in the UK, and even more than that, a female force of Soviet Union pilots, of the 588th Night Bomber Regiment, known as Nachthexen, or “night witches", due to the strange noise their early bombers made, dropping 23,000 tons of bombs on Nazi targets during 30,000 missions during WW2, it should not be questioned about women flying aircraft into battle.

FTFY.
In 1990/1 I was involved with the flying training of the first lady pilot on Tristars. Michelle (name changed to protect her modesty) was a lovely lady, and a good pilot, very well constructed, but quite short of stature, requiring her seat to be fully forward for takeoff, in order to allow her to operate the rudder pedals to their full extent. This caused a slight difficulty in that this brought her embonpoint rather close to the control column. As most of you will know, one of a pilot's pre-flight checks is to to operate all the flying controls to ensure full and free movement, thus, if the Captain was doing the take-off, when it came to operating the control column fully aft during his pre-flight check, he would call: "T1ts Michelle", allowing her to adjust her seat, if she was already fully forward, to prevent possibly painful injury. I can imagine if that occurred nowadays a woman pilot would, perhaps justifiably, take serious issue, but Michelle, trooper that she was, took it in good spirit, and was thenceforth known throughout the airline as T1ts Michelle. She later became a Captain, and a year or so ago I met a Captain on a BA flight who, when I told him I had been on Tristars, asked me if I knew T1ts Michelle, as he had gone out with her at one stage, and that she was still known by that name.
To demonstrate how things have moved on, I was recently on a long haul BA flight with two lady pilots, and the very nice Captain came back to the cabin to chat to me, and told me her boy friend was a steward working in the economy cabin!
Back in the day, male Captains lived with stewardesses.