Re: Ditch it already
Whether you like it or not, and whether it is useful or not in that role, the F35 is intended for real high intensity warfare against top tier opponents.
Until very recently, the airframe was limited to 4.5g. So it can *just about* out-fly a 1974 Piper Warrior.
The Lightning II does Mach 1.6, with a service ceiling of 50,000ft
The Lightnting *I* does Mach 2.0[1] with a service ceiling of 54,000ft[3].
It is plain to see that the earlier aircraft is a better interceptor, unless stealth capability is paramount - in which case it could probably be retrofitted to the earlier aircraft.
The reason I'm labouring the point about these two planes is that the Lightning II is now supposed to grace our skies in 2019, whereas the Lightning I flew in 1954 - well over 6 decades earlier.
Now I grant you, the F-35 has a few advantages - its range is a little better, for example - but when compared the the cold-war jets, it's pretty crap in a direct comparison, let alone allowing for the improved technology of the intervening 60 years...
Vic.
[1] I have it on good authority[2] that the earlier Lightnings could not make Mach 2 because they ran out of fuel before they got there. But the Mark 6, with the fat belly pan, had much more fuel and could do it relatively easily.
[2] Two of the instructors where I trained are former Lightning pilots. Neither will have a bad word spoken against that aircraft.
[3] There is a tale of a Lightning intercepting a U2 at 88,000ft. This involved a ballistic ascent, but gives a clue as to just how incredible was this aircraft.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
