4 ms·
> As a single engine light platform with a small arsenal of just four air-to-air missiles It is quite the opposite, it is a lardy brute heavier than Japan's tw
by dingaling 9y ago
> As a single engine light platform with a small arsenal of just four air-to-air missiles
It is quite the opposite, it is a lardy brute heavier than Japan's two previous top-line fighters:
Maximum take-off weight tonnes / installed thrust tonnes / length
F-35A 31.8 / 19 / 15.7
F-15C 30.8 / 22 / 19.4
F-4E 28 / 16.4 / 19.2
And for comparison:
F-22 38+ / 32 / 18.9
Both the F-15 and 22 show their air superiority primary mission with higher thrust-to-weight ratios, which approach unity once transit field is burned off. But the F-35 is not a light fighter, it is a modern-day F-4. Maybe it should have been named Phantom III...
- riku_iki 9y agoI think they refer to the fact that only 4 AIM-120 missiles currently can fit F-35's internal bay. It is promised to be fixed in the future, with 6 missiles be places inside.
- LyndsySimon 9y agoMy understanding is that an F-35 carrying AIM-120s (AMRAAMs) is kind of a stopgap measure anyhow. The AMRAAM was designed to be deployed externally on the F-15 and F-16; the next-generation missile will be smaller and designed to be deployed in internal bays, therefore increasing the number that can be carried. My memory said that the new missile was called the "NRAAM" or something similar, but I can't find reference to it anywhere after a brief search. Maybe that idea was scrapped?
- riku_iki 9y agoI never heard about any planned AMRAAM successor.. Also those missiles would have shorter range if being smaller..