主题：再谈F-35的空战性能 -- 晨枫

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-18089.html

F-16论坛上看来的，澳大利亚一个智库为澳大利亚国防部举行过一次F-35空战性能演示，一直没有看到详细结果，这里是第一次看到间接描述，报告原本还是没有看到，估计是保密的。

摘录如下：

"Uploaded by ComputerHarpoon on Jan 4, 2010

A H3 MilSim simulation of air combat between 24 * F-35A JSF and 8 * Su-35S.

Results:

Su-35S overmatch the F-35A

Armaments:

F-35A: BVR 4 * AIM-120D; Guns Mauser 25 MM

Su-35S: BVR Adder 6 * R-77 Active Seeker, 6 * R-77 IR Seeker; WVR Archer 2 * R-73; Gun GSH301 30 MM

Courtesy REPSIM PTY LTD, Australia

Setting: North-East Australia

1. Our Simulation is a derivative work of Mr. Bond's Harpoon system. We allow users to input their own sensor, weapon, and platform data. Given that, our Australian partners, with some 35 yrs in the Defense Business, including a former RAAF Wing Commander, created a database and this demonstration scenario. This demonstrates how H3 MilSim can be used to try out different scenarios using your data and your scenarios. This particular scenario doesn't fare well for the JSF.... Your values for Pd, Ph, Pk on the sensors and missiles will yield different results.

2. The RAND Corporation came up with the same conclusions about 2 years ago separately for the USAF.

3. F-35 V Su-35 aircraft, the Scenario Author's Notes:

The simulation is an accurate representation of the kinematic performance of both the aircraft and the missiles as well as sensor performance.

The F-35 CTOL due to its stealth configuration and internal carriage of weapons has altitude, release speed and attitude constraints for missile launch that dramatically reduce the AIM 120 missile performance compared to firing the missile from other aircraft such as F-16 or F-15 that can burn the missile off the rails at higher speeds and with full attitude freedom. Some of these limitations also apply to the F-22.

The Su-35 aircraft enjoys significant advantages over the F-35 in terms of absolute altitude, speed, weapon capacity and weapon release speed. However, maneuverability in the terminal phase of an air to air missile engagement is where the Su-35 enjoys a substantial advantage using integrated thrustered engine control rather than relying solely upon control surfaces in thin air.

That is why the engagement is at high altitude as opposed to denser low altitude air.

This kinematic advantage translates into a reduced no-escape zone calculation for the release of the AIM 120 missile against the Su-35. The maximum release range for an AIM 120 against the Su-35 employing its full range of capabilities is less than 20nm based upon its specific impulse, burn duration (boost and sustain), control surface effectiveness above 50,000ft and susceptibility to countermeasures. Beyond that no-escape zone the AIM 120 missile has less than 5 % chance of hitting the target.

The US DoD had a program to improve the AIM 120 missile using a number of aspects such as additional fuel and 2 stage motor as well as better electronic counter counter measures (ECCM) but these have not delivered as yet.

The Su-35 or indeed any of the modern Su and Mig aircraft can bleed sufficient energy off a coasting AIM 120 missile at high altitude to cause it to reach minimum energy level in less than 15 seconds with a combination of maneuvers.

The current generation of AA-12 missiles are able to be launched effectively from more than 3 times the AIM 120 no-escape zone because of the energy advantage provided at launch, greater specific impulse, burn duration both boost and sustain, (due to larger fuel fraction) and good control surface performance at altitude.

The F-35 has limited kinematic evasive capability against advanced air to air missiles for example, it cannot sustain a 6 G turn at Mach 1 at 40,000ft. And this was why an additional energy based defensive system was designed into the aircraft.

However, this solution is not effective beyond the scanning limits of the DAS and the Russian (and Chinese) technique of launching dissimilar sensored missiles in salvos against adversary aircraft, nor is it inherently reliable. This generally leads to defeating aircraft such as F-35 due to the focus in the defensive cycle being ordered first by the active radar seeker turning on and the passive infra red (IR) sensor being able to achieve lock at twice the range of the radar seeker from both the head on or side against the F-35.

The F-35 now has a large head-on IR signature due to the excessive heat generated by the systems inside the nose radome, in excess to 200C. Its rear plume at military power is visible at over 50 kms to advanced IR sensors.

The reality is that the F-35 in air to air combat against most modern fighters has to cross a large killing zone before attempting to engage a target that can at anytime turn and out run the F-35 engagement zone based upon radar or IR sensor detection plotting.

In most simulations the F-35 is destroyed well before launching its weapons.

http://www.harpoon3pro.com

http://www.agi.com

http://www.computerharpoon.com

http://www.digitalmilitaryart.com

摘译如下：

24架F-35A（各4xAIM120，25mm航炮）对8架苏-35（各6xR77雷达加6xR77红外加2xR73，30mm航炮）

仿真平台：H3 MilSim

设定：澳大利亚东北

- F-35A的速度-升限包线和弹舱开门限制了AIM120的性能，F-15、F-16可以更好地发挥AIM120的性能。

- 苏-35比F-35的速度、升限、导弹发射速度限制、导弹挂载量明显优越，更有利于在高空空战。

- F-35和苏-35的速度-高度差极大地限制了AIM120的不可逃逸区，根据AIM120的发动机比冲、燃烧时间、50000英尺（约15240米）高度时控制面效率和苏-35的电子对抗能力，AIM120最大有效发射距离不超过20海里（37公里）。

- 苏-35（或者任何现代苏或米格）可以通过机动在15秒钟内使AIM120下降到最低能量水平。

- 但从能量水平来说，苏-35的R77比F-35的AIM120高三倍。

- F-35不能在40000英尺（约12200米）以M1做6g持续机动

- 如果苏-35同时发射雷达和红外制导导弹，F-35还要惨。F-35的机头由于AESA而达到200C的温度，军推尾流可以用先进红外在50公里外看到。

结论：F-35在空战中，需要穿越很大的对方杀伤区才能发射自己的AIM120导弹。在大部分仿真设定中，F-35在发射导弹前就被击落。

===============

在一个小时的演示中，不到30分钟时，就有至少5个人离席，但反对党的首席国防批评家留下来了。很难说这个演示是否完全公平、精确，是否有太多的党派政治因素，但至少这个仿真有点内容。硬伤在于用Harpoon 3 Pro的仿真核心，这在本质上是一个高级游戏。不过仿真的数学是一样的，游戏或者“专业”软件的差别或许不在于数学，而在于数据库。关键不在于精确到小数点的结论，而在于定性结论。如果他们的定性结论由于关键假定或者数据而出大错，那应该很容易指出。他们声称2008年兰德仿真得出同样的结果，那个仿真也是只流传于传说中，从来没有看到过实际报告。

• 说比日本强恐怕还早

送花成功。有效送花赞扬。感谢：作者获得通宝一枚。

作者，声望:1；铢钱:16。你，乐善:1；铢钱:-1。本帖花:1

晨枫一直不看好F-35啊。

感觉美国把F-22金屋藏娇，而出售低档的F-35，最后的后果可能出乎意料。当年苏联出售猴版武器，搞得苏制武器名声受很大影响。对所有盟友都藏着掖着，谁知道将来会怎么样呢。

最近看收藏的F-22模型，盒子上有F-22的订货量下降的历史表，从750到不到200架，规模优势全都没了，是性价比的大忌啊。

挺有意思

您贴的原文说这个很重要，是否能翻译一下？

“然而，空空导弹交战的终段机动性是苏-35通过发动机推力转向控制而不是在稀薄空气中单纯依赖气动控制面控制而享有显著优势的地方。”用大白话说，就是在空气稀薄的高空，苏-35的向量推力比常规的气动控制有效得多，拉开和空空导弹的末端机动的能量差，有望甩掉导弹。

http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=1101

Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations

里边还有模拟歼20的剧本，有点意思。

http://www.warfaresims.com/?p=1379

数据库更新，地形描述更准确。要是能凑够足够感兴趣的河友，没准以这个为蓝本可以搞搞模拟或对抗什么的也许会好玩。

外挂14枚导弹的SU-35能比之内挂4枚导弹的F35能有啥速度-高度优势啊？

这种情况，除开导弹挂载量，SU35该什么优势也没有。

现在的AIM120至少也是C系列，航程超过100公里了吧，能量水平R77也就跟它相当吧，更别说电子技术水平可能差异。

难道不考虑非隐形机对隐形机，飞机雷达发现锁定，导弹上小雷达发现锁定的距离差异？

现在这个样子，哎……

如果F35连苏35都打不过，MD真的要走下神坛了。

歼20以10：8惨胜，日方损失9架F-15，一架E-767。不过，有意思的是，模拟中歼20发射PL-12中距弹的距离是5海里，约合10公里不到，由于模拟中假定歼20超音速机动能力不如F-22，故F-15反击时发射的导弹全部命中。请问晨大，为何歼20要到10公里距离才迎头发射中距弹？是因为超音速缩小了发射范围还是这个模拟的设定有问题呢？

更新输入参数重来一遍，那就好了。

老大不会拿F-35和su35争空优。兔子和老大差不多。基本上想单挑杨宗保不可能，准备好老太君，穆桂英，八姐九妹……一起来。

丝带的中距弹肯定不是PL-12。一般中距弹对内弹仓来说尺寸太大，需要重新设计。我们看到的PL-12的尺寸比AIM120还大。PL-12的不知道能打多远，SD-10是75公里左右。这个距离抵消了四代的优势。丝带是系统工程，我想配套的中距弹一定早就在做了。所以你把这个游戏交给成飞，他们可能都不知道怎么设置。

原文看的较为艰苦，其实也就是中距空战演示（近距离基本上没悬念了），整个模拟过程更类似于飞行性能的对比过程，个别方面比较有缺失，比如目标特征方面，雷达特征被忽略了，F35的隐身特性被忽略了,而红外特征被详细描述。抛开Su35的雷达反射特征不提，俄国的AESE应该比美制性能差一些，估计发热等特征会更强（除非模拟中Su35只装备了脉冲多普勒），红外特征只会比F35强。同样传感器性能的比较也被忽略了，当然对澳大利亚来说比较困难，两型飞机都未装备过。

综合比较可能F35抢先发现Su35的概略要高一些吧。

而且F35携带4枚AIM120似乎也偏少了。2010年报道，洛马正在发展可带3枚AIM120的新舱门，不知道进展如何，SU35装备14枚导弹可也确实满载了，起码2吨以上了，不知道对空战模拟中机型重量是否有影响？

不过F35真是扶不起的阿斗啊，还是和Su35比对地吧：）