F-16.net

Newbie Joined: Jul 14, 2008 Posts: 13 Status: Offline

Hello;

Let me introduce myself, my name is Mike, I've been browsing this website for years... fantastic!!! However, I go on another forum, and there's a user who somehow thinks a SU-35 could kill a F-22. Now obviously that's complete and utter bull # and you'll all agree with me there!!! Only problem is he's spamming up the forum and the last thing we need is more Sukhoi fanboys in the mix if you know what I mean. Laughing

I guess some of you could find it comedy too...!

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4625725

Quote:

The problem is multifold. First, the standard mode for the AMRAAM to use is a datalinked Semi-active-homing mode. Track-While-Scan mode enables the F-22 to give no indication to the target's RWR that he's been illuminated by a tracking radar. However, the Russians aren't stupid. They can detect the datalink, and it's safe to assume their jammers will start singing and jam the datalink. The F-22s fire control system will try and compensate and the missile will likely automatically switch into a passive homing mode to home in on the jamming signal - however, by time the missile realizes it's being jammed, and switches, the Su-35 will have had ample time to slip outside of its acquisition envelope - or slip outside of any possible interception arcs.

So - the only thing to do is fire the missile in "beam riding" mode (another form of semi-active homing) - where the target is illuminated by the host aircraft's radar and the missile intercepts the illuminated target.

So may I have some help, atleast basics, or some links, to help me debunk this garbage? I know some about Air to Air combat but of course it's best to get some more opinions!!!

Smile

Thanks!

F-16.net Sponsor

This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.

Why bother?

Newbie Joined: Jul 14, 2008 Posts: 13 Status: Offline

akruse21 wrote:

Why bother?

Because it's like clubbing seals. Laughing

PeanutMike wrote:

Hello;

Let me introduce myself, my name is Mike, I've been browsing this website for years... fantastic!!! However, I go on another forum, and there's a user who somehow thinks a SU-35 could kill a F-22. Now obviously that's complete and utter bull # and you'll all agree with me there!!! Only problem is he's spamming up the forum and the last thing we need is more Sukhoi fanboys in the mix if you know what I mean. Laughing

I guess some of you could find it comedy too...!

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr ... pid4625725

Quote:

The problem is multifold. First, the standard mode for the AMRAAM to use is a datalinked Semi-active-homing mode. Track-While-Scan mode enables the F-22 to give no indication to the target's RWR that he's been illuminated by a tracking radar. However, the Russians aren't stupid. They can detect the datalink, and it's safe to assume their jammers will start singing and jam the datalink. The F-22s fire control system will try and compensate and the missile will likely automatically switch into a passive homing mode to home in on the jamming signal - however, by time the missile realizes it's being jammed, and switches, the Su-35 will have had ample time to slip outside of its acquisition envelope - or slip outside of any possible interception arcs.

So - the only thing to do is fire the missile in "beam riding" mode (another form of semi-active homing) - where the target is illuminated by the host aircraft's radar and the missile intercepts the illuminated target.

So may I have some help, atleast basics, or some links, to help me debunk this garbage? I know some about Air to Air combat but of course it's best to get some more opinions!!!

Smile

Thanks!

Oh, damn.

That guy is actually exactly right. They've finally figured out how to defeat the F-22. If only LM had thought of such tactics first :snap fingers sound: There goes some $80 billion down the drain...

Senior member Joined: Dec 14, 2006 Posts: 473

The biggest threat to the F-22 is Congress, funding, economy, loose lips and espionage. The F-22 has already been somewhat castrated because of funding cuts.

Could an SU-35 shoot down an F-22? Sure; even a Spad could shoot down an F-22; however it would be extremely unlikely. The odds are extremely in the favor of the F-22. Like they say in this business; even a golden BB can take you out; in other words even some of the smallest things can be a threat and luck can be a factor/wildcard.

As far as trying to jam a missile, remember that many missiles today are capable of homing in on jam. You might be able to jam some missiles; but remember that a jammer is an active signal and can be used to detect and give a bearing and can help an enemy detect and kill you. Jamming can be a two-way street and also can be an issue of how advanced the technology is. In many cases; a jammer can make an aircraft easier to detect and shoot down and can also indicate possible hostile intent and elevate the threat level..

Why let some noob on a message board bother you? I find many of their claims to be laughable.

Like before operation Iraqi freedom; there was many message boards that claimed that the Iraqis had a new version of stealth radar that would render our stealth to be ineffective; thusly not a single bomb would fall on Iraq and that our air forces would be decimated on the first day,.

PeanutMike wrote:

akruse21 wrote:

Why bother?

Because it's like clubbing seals. Laughing

I disagree. Seals are cute; and some of them are smart enough to realize that they are being defeated. Wink

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 1012 Status: Offline

PeanutMike wrote:

akruse21 wrote:

Why bother?

Because it's like clubbing seals. Laughing

"ATS" 'nuff said.

How to kill an F-22? Well throwing a hand of assorted nuts and bolts into the intake would probably kill one. lol Razz

PeanutMike wrote:

However, I go on another forum, and there's a user who somehow thinks a SU-35 could kill a F-22. Now obviously that's complete and utter bull # and you'll all agree with me there!!! Only problem is he's spamming up the forum and the last thing we need is more Sukhoi fanboys in the mix if you know what I mean.

If you don't feed the troll, it dies.

Senior member Joined: Dec 14, 2006 Posts: 473

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

PeanutMike wrote:

However, I go on another forum, and there's a user who somehow thinks a SU-35 could kill a F-22. Now obviously that's complete and utter bull # and you'll all agree with me there!!! Only problem is he's spamming up the forum and the last thing we need is more Sukhoi fanboys in the mix if you know what I mean.

If you don't feed the troll, it dies.

I disagree.

Even if you don’t feed the trolls, their parents most often do, because most trolls are still sponging off their parents.

More seriously. You do have a point that sometimes if you don’t engage the troll that they sometimes will become board and go elsewhere. That’s just ignoring the problem and letting it go elsewhere. Sure in many cases it’s best not to engage a troll, however there are times to lockup or execute trolls. Wink

I do understand and largely agree with your point. However that’s not always the appropriate action.

ATFS_Crash wrote:

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

PeanutMike wrote:

However, I go on another forum, and there's a user who somehow thinks a SU-35 could kill a F-22. Now obviously that's complete and utter bull # and you'll all agree with me there!!! Only problem is he's spamming up the forum and the last thing we need is more Sukhoi fanboys in the mix if you know what I mean.

If you don't feed the troll, it dies.

I disagree.

Even if you don’t feed the trolls, their parents most often do, because most trolls are still sponging off their parents.

HA! That's good.

ATFS_Crash wrote:

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

PeanutMike wrote:

However, I go on another forum, and there's a user who somehow thinks a SU-35 could kill a F-22. Now obviously that's complete and utter bull # and you'll all agree with me there!!! Only problem is he's spamming up the forum and the last thing we need is more Sukhoi fanboys in the mix if you know what I mean.

If you don't feed the troll, it dies.

Sure in many cases it’s best not to engage a troll, however there are times to lockup or execute trolls. Wink

I do understand and largely agree with your point. However that’s not always the appropriate action.

Eh. I agree with that and I'm all for blasting someone out of the water who definately deserves it.

I'm also under the belief that most trolls are looking to get their jollies off no matter what facts or reason you present to them. You can argue til you're blue in the face and they'll want to counter "argue" just because they see it as fun to do so.

But I don't live on the internet and have a job and resonsibilities, I don't have time like they do to muss around on the internet all day arguing so I usually go with my #1 policy of not handing out food.

Military commanders are often confronted with technologically superior opponents. The F-22 is no different as far as challenges go. The least favorable option would be a direct confrontation so expect asymmetric attacks. Direct action by commandos or sabotage for instance. Think of the Israeli raid onto enemy airfield to rescue hostages. Simply changing objective from hostage rescue to direct assault against F-22's Park on the ground. Other variations include GPS guided mortars, anti-material rifles, kamikaze suicide attacks or many other methods.

The raptors can also be targeted by enemy airstrikes, ballistic missiles or cruise missiles while parked on the ground. These are the ubiquitous anti-access threats. There are also issues of basing rights and overflight permission. Through diplomacy, an enemy can still deny access, even if he lacks the military means to do so.

Indirectly an opponent can also target the logistics associated with the aircraft. Think of the Schweinfurt "double strike mission" against the German Air Force by the Allies during World War II. Fuel farms, maintenance/support/production facilities do not shoot back. Nor do tanker aircraft. But their loss could have disproportionate effects on the force.

Also consider that the F-22 force is a small one. I'm not just talking about aircraft, I'm referring to key personnel. The loss of these personnel can seriously degrade the effectiveness of the F-22. Security clearance restrictions and training requirements would make the replacement of key personnel a very challenging issue. These personnel could be assassinated in their homes or killed while deployed. What if an F-22 squadron and family members all received "antrax" letters. Even if they weren't real, the delays could be significant in the opening days of a campaign. Japanese Fleet Admiral Yamamoto suffered the fate of being directly targeted.

And then there is everybody's favorite issue of only 187 aircraft. While it is probably enough, it's certainly not enough to squander them away recklessly. Each and every loss would be very significant considering that only two thirds are combat coded. The F-22's are a high demand low availability asset. So anything that reduces their operational tempo or actually destroys an aircraft is a very significant event.

A competent opponent will use various combinations of all these methods. Remember, in Operation Desert Storm, a large number of Iraqi fighter aircraft actually survived the conflict in fact. It is not necessary in war to directly target enemy fighter aircraft to render them ineffective.

-DA

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 1012 Status: Offline

Just my two cents but probably as with Backfires in the GIUK Gap in the Cold War, the best way would be to hit the bases while the planes are still on the ground. Knock out the runways and the F-22s won't be going anywhere. Don't know how fast they could patch it up again though. And I imagine the thing could get off the ground in a fairly short distance in a pinch.

Senior member Joined: Dec 14, 2006 Posts: 473

Scorpion1alpha wrote:

You can argue til you're blue in the face and they'll want to counter "argue" just because they see it as fun to do so.

But I don't live on the internet and have a job and resonsibilities, I don't have time like they do to muss around on the internet all day arguing so I usually go with my #1 policy of not handing out food.

Part of the reason you can’t beat a troll on their own terms is because they are unreasonable and do not accept facts and logic. Since trolls often sponge off their parents, they have more time, because they are not like most of us that are productive members of society and do honest work for a living, they have the time to think up all kinds of weird stuff. Since most of them are too ignorant and lazy to get a real honest job, they sponge off their parents. The combination of ignorance and lots of free time is a good combination for a troll, because it gives the troll a lot of time to do a lot of research and take things out of context for unfounded attacks, based on nutty conspiracy “theories“.

Parents don’t let your children become trolls. If you let your child become a troll in adolescence, odds are you’ll have a 30-year-old child living in your basement living off Twinkies and beer. Do the world a favor, kick them out tell them to get a real honest job in the real world and let them face the consequences to their own actions/or lack of action.

The best way to beat a troll, is to kick them out of their parents house (take away their Twinkies and Kool-Aid) and tell them to get a real honest job.

sferrin wrote:

Just my two cents but probably as with Backfires in the GIUK Gap in the Cold War, the best way would be to hit the bases while the planes are still on the ground. Knock out the runways and the F-22s won't be going anywhere. Don't know how fast they could patch it up again though. And I imagine the thing could get off the ground in a fairly short distance in a pinch.

It's been shown in combat that cratering runways is fairly ineffective in anything more than temporarily stopping flight operations. Although combined with other methods, it could be useful. It's a lot easier to repair concrete than it is to replace aircraft or critical infrastructure/personnel.

-DA

Newbie Joined: Nov 07, 2007 Posts: 14 Status: Offline

This isn't rocket science, oh wait it is. Our LM and EC and ECM folks have a few brain cells and to keep this subject in the "safe zone" if the target is actively jamming an inbound weapon you have now made the job EASIER for the weapon. If you think a data link is easy to jam, you might be dead wrong, with a spread spectrum frequency hopping system, just like the link the newer consumer rc planes use the signal can handle active jamming as well as an incredible "noise floor" being introduced. This is at the consumer level, now imagine mil spec requirements. Anyone can get lucky with a golden BB, on the flip side what if the 22 doesn't pull off a one shot one kill ratio, crtl, alt, del and try again. The deck is stacked in our corner and our greatest military weakness is sadly from people who have never dressed up as a tree and served.

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

How to kill an F-22?