Forum: General F-35 Forum

river_otter wrote:

jeffb wrote:

Another valiant attempt but RCS isn't an absolute it's relative, especially when comparing two combat aircraft that depend on it for survivability. Based on power output of the respective radars and published RCS values the F-22 can see the F-35 at around 20nmi, the F-35 can see the F-22 at around 10nmi, making for a significant illustration of the relative values of the aircraft's RCS.

This just shows why your comparison is so meaningless. You don't even recognize it.
Hint: The F-22 will not be fighting the F-35. The F-35 will not be fighting the F-22.

Even the F-35 will already see the MiGs, Sukhois, Chengdus, and SAM sites they will be fighting long before the MiGs, Sukhois, Chengdus, and SAMs will see the F-35. Hence, making the F-35 stealthier than it is doesn't make it any deadlier against its actual opponents. And it's already been stated the F-35 went way past its RCS specs, so even those estimates are probably understating the F-35's range advantage.

No, I'm afraid you've completely missed the point. My example simply illustrated why your original claim that the F-22 was stealthier than it needed to be was mistaken and that it's the relative values of these aspects of aircraft design which are significant. The F-22 and F-35 aircraft in the example are two reduced signature aircraft that some published data exists on that can be used to illustrate the point simply...or so I'd hoped.

When was it claimed that the F-35 went 'way' past its RCS specs? If you're refering to Venlets statement that the pole/acceptance testing of one of the original LRIP aircraft went 'better than expected' I'd point out that there is no evidence he was speaking about the aircraft's RCS performance. Indeed, at the time that he made the statement, a number of things were not going well for the program and he may well have been simply expressing his relief that the aircraft got through the testing process without any major issues requiring rework appearing. At the time I personally marked the note of relief in his voice when he made that statement and have subsequently been bemused by the fandoms seizure on that statement as evidence that the aircraft actually performed better than spec in regard to it's RCS performance (which would be a first for the program).

And I did not 'admit' that the F-35 would enjoy a 6:1 LER, I merely used that figure in the example because not using it would have resulted in half a dozen exchanges of this nature where people would demand that I substantiate that the LER ratio is not 6:1 despite bugger all effort on the fandoms part to justify that value in the first place. It most certainly does *not* enjoy "a 6:1 LER (or possibly more) advantage over everthing it is likely to fight" as you suggest, the 6:1 LER figure touted by LM referred originally to 4th gen threat aircraft and has only recently been expanded to include more recent threat aircraft although the language they use is not terribly clear and when questioned they are deliberately vague on exactly which threat aircraft they mean.

delvo wrote:

jeffb wrote:

Nobody was going to buy F-35s if the F-22 was available

This claim seems to be where the "which is better" argument started. But it's not the claim that you actually ended up defending later down the road in that argument. For example:

jeffb wrote:

The F-22 has the performance parameters it has because it was designed to be an air superiority fighter. If you think that those numbers have no relevance in an air to air fight or don't reflect the aircraft's ability gain and maintain a tactical advantage over an opponent I'd say you're deluding yourself.

Bringing up F-22's traits that serve its purpose as a dedicated air-to-air fighter defends only a claim that it is the best air-to-air fighter, which is not the claim you started with. You've backtracked, also known as "moving the goalposts". The argument that F-22 is a better air-to-air fighter than F-35 is could very well be true while it still remained false that "nobody was going to buy F-35s if the F-22 was available".

Sorry no. My original claim was that nobody would buy the F-35 if they could have the F-22. This is because the roles that the F-35 will be placed in with non-US air forces are the "first days of the war" roles, primarily air-superiority, suppression of enemy air defences and strategic strike. Because the F-22 is so much more capable in these roles than the F-35, a Government shopping for systems to protect their sovereignty would be far more likely to buy F-22s instead of F-35s because of that improved capability.

That seems pretty obvious to me, especially as those are the roles the US has detailed the F-22s for and not the F-35.

river_otter wrote:

jeffb wrote:

Actually any number divided by zero is undefined. The limit as the denominator approaches zero is infinity but as 0.1 airframes isn't much use as a comparison of capability, one airframe would be the smallest logical number of airframes one could consider realistically. As long as we restrict the discussion to aircraft that have made it to prototype stage we won't have a problem. Fortunately both the F-35 and F-22 have reached this stage.

So in your opinion comparing a single prototype of a cancelled program to a finished program with an actual production run is a fair comparison? That is frankly ridiculous.

No it isn't ridiculous if that is all you have to compare. What about block upgrades? Should we only compare aircraft that have had the same number of block upgrades? What about F-16D's? Can they be fairly compared with F-16A's? What about the planned block upgrades for the F-22? Should they be taken into account in any comparison with the F-35? And which F-35? What level of capability will be achieved by IOC? Which may well be before FRP!

river_otter wrote:

My point is, you have to compare programs at the same point in development, or you're comparing apples and oranges. You can either compare the LRIP F-22s (historical) to the LRIP F-35s (historical/present), or you can make a reasonable estimate of the mature F-35 and compare it to the mature F-22.

But that leaves us in the situation I was describing, the F-35 will be in LRIP production for at least another 4.5 years, that is if their production scheme runs to plan (which would be another first for the program). That makes any comparison up to that point impossible via your method. Should we compare a finished aircraft with what you think/hope the F-35 capabilities will be when (and if) it reaches FRP? That doesn't sound like a particularly fair comparison either. Mine simply deals with what is now currently known about the two aircraft and what it's cost to get there without all the wishin' and a'hopin'.

I’ll admit it isn’t the best possible comparison, but to me it’s better than comparing a 'finished' F-22 to your ‘imaginary’ F-35.

F-16.net Sponsor

geogen wrote:

And escort the F-22 with a tactical-configured F-15E+, equipped with large aperture IRST and next-gen Sniper SE pod... and see F-35 at 50nm +?? Wink

The important thing is that we don't start fantasizing about aircraft that don't exist and/or are not in production.[/quote]

Like for instance the F-35?

checksixx wrote:

There is no F-15E+ and no F-15 Silent Eagle in production. Either way, I'm sure the Raptor pilot would want them FAR away from him/her.

Other way around you'd think. You'd rather the bad guys were concentrating on the great big F-15 blip rather than the tiny little smudge which might or might not be your F-22 wouldn't you?

1. The F-35's LRIP is being produced in annual numbers larger than other's FRP.
2. The F-35 is in Production (that's the P in LRIP).
3. Better to be an unknown small blip (if any blip at all) among many than flying next to a big blip that lets them know you're coming.

SpudmanWP wrote:

1. The F-35's LRIP is being produced in annual numbers larger than other's FRP.
2. The F-35 is in Production (that's the P in LRIP).
3. Better to be an unknown small blip (if any blip at all) among many than flying next to a big blip that lets them know you're coming.

1. & 2. So if the F-35's in 'production' at rates greater than other aircrafts FRP we can compare them fairly with the F-22 yes?

3. They know you're coming. A small smudge next to a big blip is more likely to be a sensor echo unless it's actually a F-22 which will be a nasty surprise. Not being what they think/know is coming, also a nasty surprise.

jeffb wrote:

The important thing is that we don't start fantasizing about aircraft that don't exist and/or are not in production.

Like for instance the F-35?

checksixx wrote:

There is no F-15E+ and no F-15 Silent Eagle in production. Either way, I'm sure the Raptor pilot would want them FAR away from him/her.

Other way around you'd think. You'd rather the bad guys were concentrating on the great big F-15 blip rather than the tiny little smudge which might or might not be your F-22 wouldn't you?[/quote]

You actually quoted me Jeff...I wasn't aware you were unfamiliar with the F-35 program. It is in production...has been for awhile now...and of course does exist. To get up to speed and for further information, you can go to

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/

or

https://f35.com/

As far as having the bad guys concentrating on the F-15 rather than me, no, I wouldn't. My F-22 is stealthy enough that I'm not worried about other fighters radar detecting me as of right now. By the time they figure out a little radar return, small enough that any normal pilot would ignore as clutter, is a F-22, they've already got a missile headed their way. Kind of the same reason we didn't have F-15's escorting F-117's.

1&2, The F-35 Blk2 compares very well to the initial F-22s in A2A and totally smokes it in A2G.

3. They may know you're coming at some point, but if you can delay them from knowing from what direction and exactly when you are coming then your chances of a successful mission and survival of the crew greatly increase.

Besides, if you really want a big blip to hide behind, then use the MALD. At least it can turn it's blip on & off as needed and costs less in terms of money and crew lives than a 4th gen "ride-a-long" escort/decoy.

checksixx wrote:

jeffb wrote:

The important thing is that we don't start fantasizing about aircraft that don't exist and/or are not in production.

Like for instance the F-35?

checksixx wrote:

There is no F-15E+ and no F-15 Silent Eagle in production. Either way, I'm sure the Raptor pilot would want them FAR away from him/her.

Other way around you'd think. You'd rather the bad guys were concentrating on the great big F-15 blip rather than the tiny little smudge which might or might not be your F-22 wouldn't you?

You actually quoted me Jeff...I wasn't aware you were unfamiliar with the F-35 program. It is in production...has been for awhile now...and of course does exist. To get up to speed and for further information, you can go to

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/

or

https://f35.com/

As far as having the bad guys concentrating on the F-15 rather than me, no, I wouldn't. My F-22 is stealthy enough that I'm not worried about other fighters radar detecting me as of right now. By the time they figure out a little radar return, small enough that any normal pilot would ignore as clutter, is a F-22, they've already got a missile headed their way. Kind of the same reason we didn't have F-15's escorting F-117's.[/quote]

Laughing

Thanks checksixx, I'll have to check those links.

And, yep sure, as far as the ride along escort goes, I guess it depends on what you're trying to achieve on the day. Nice thing about the ride along escorts though is that they can each carry another half-a-dozen amraams.

Again, you're missing the point of surprise.

A flight of VLO inbound fighters has a good chance of getting to its target with only a small chance of running into a patrolling flight of defenders. In that case the VLO's own AMRAAMs will be enough to deal with the enemy.

A "ride-a-long" escort attracts everyone's attention and virtually guarantees the need for those extra AMRAAMs as every patrolling fighter in the area is vectored to you.

SpudmanWP wrote:

1&2, The F-35 Blk2 compares very well to the initial F-22s in A2A and totally smokes it in A2G.

Based on...

And why does it smoke the F-22 in A2G again?

They both have ground mapping radar and the ability to track surface targets. The F-35 has the EOTS and technically, the F-22 had similar tech lined up for a block upgrade. DAS is a nice to have but doesn't on it's own make the F-35 a 'smokin' A2G machine and the F-22 has better 'reach'.

SpudmanWP wrote:

Again, you're missing the point of surprise.

A flight of VLO inbound fighters has a good chance of getting to its target with only a small chance of running into a patrolling flight of defenders. In that case the VLO's own AMRAAMs will be enough to deal with the enemy.

A "ride-a-long" escort attracts everyone's attention and virtually guarantees the need for those extra AMRAAMs as every patrolling fighter in the area is vectored to you.

Unless of course you're looking to wipe out the majority of their patrolling fighters in one fell swoop.

How is it better than the F-22 in A2G?? Really?

1. F-22 has no FLIR. The only way the F-22 can track a ground target is to actively use it's radar.
2. F-35 has much better A2G radar modes and munitions capabilities.
3. F-22 has no LGB capability so no precision A2G attacks are possible.
4. F-35 can carry 2k bombs
5. F-35 has EODAS which can not only track every A2A threat, but also detect & track AAA and act as a visual queue for ground targets.
6. F-22 has only two A2G munitions, the SDB1 and a 1k JDAM.
7. F-35 will get new weapons as they come online thanks to UAI.
8. Even with the latest Post-SDD F-22 upgrades, the F-22 can only target 4 A2G targets simultaneously. The F-35 can target 16 A2G at the same time.
9. The F-35's HMD not only provide wide-angle & binocular night vision, but also visual queues of tracked targets (and friendlies) on the ground.

SpudmanWP wrote:

How is it better than the F-22 in A2G?? Really?

1. F-22 has no FLIR. The only way the F-22 can track a ground target is to actively use it's radar.
2. F-35 has much better A2G radar modes and munitions capabilities.
3. F-22 has no LGB capability so no precision A2G attacks are possible.
4. F-35 can carry 2k bombs
5. F-35 has EODAS which can not only track every A2A threat, but also detect & track AAA and act as a visual queue for ground targets.
6. F-22 has only two A2G munitions, the SDB1 and a 1k JDAM.
7. F-35 will get new weapons as they come online thanks to UAI.
8. Even with the latest Post-SDD F-22 upgrades, the F-22 can only target 4 A2G targets simultaneously. The F-35 can target 16 A2G at the same time.
9. The F-35's HMD not only provide wide-angle & binocular night vision, but also visual queues of tracked targets (and friendlies) on the ground.

But... but... F-35... not go as fast... only one engine... no TVC... not as stealthy... not look as cool... WAAAAAAAAAAH, WAAAAAAAAAAAH.

SpudmanWP wrote:

How is it better than the F-22 in A2G?? Really?

1. F-22 has no FLIR. The only way the F-22 can track a ground target is to actively use it's radar.
2. F-35 has much better A2G radar modes and munitions capabilities.
3. F-22 has no LGB capability so no precision A2G attacks are possible.
4. F-35 can carry 2k bombs
5. F-35 has EODAS which can not only track every A2A threat, but also detect & track AAA and act as a visual queue for ground targets.
6. F-22 has only two A2G munitions, the SDB1 and a 1k JDAM.
7. F-35 will get new weapons as they come online thanks to UAI.
8. Even with the latest Post-SDD F-22 upgrades, the F-22 can only target 4 A2G targets simultaneously. The F-35 can target 16 A2G at the same time.
9. The F-35's HMD not only provide wide-angle & binocular night vision, but also visual queues of tracked targets (and friendlies) on the ground.

Oh ok, so you're just highlighting the fact that the F-35 was designed to be a battlefield interdiction bomber with good SA to avoid AAA and MANPADS.
Rolling Eyes

But if you need to get to a target fast and stealthy and as long as you don't need to hit with something bigger than a 1k lbs bomb, the F-22's is the more survivable platform.

I would agree with that. As outlined before, the Raptor is ideal for OCA, SEAD, and strategic attack. The Joint Strike Fighter is, go figure, a strike aircraft in the vein of a stealthy Block 60, except a little better than even that.

SpudmanWP wrote:

How is it better than the F-22 in A2G?? Really?

1. F-22 has no FLIR. The only way the F-22 can track a ground target is to actively use it's radar.
2. F-35 has much better A2G radar modes and munitions capabilities.
3. F-22 has no LGB capability so no precision A2G attacks are possible.
4. F-35 can carry 2k bombs
5. F-35 has EODAS which can not only track every A2A threat, but also detect & track AAA and act as a visual queue for ground targets.
6. F-22 has only two A2G munitions, the SDB1 and a 1k JDAM.
7. F-35 will get new weapons as they come online thanks to UAI.
8. Even with the latest Post-SDD F-22 upgrades, the F-22 can only target 4 A2G targets simultaneously. The F-35 can target 16 A2G at the same time.
9. The F-35's HMD not only provide wide-angle & binocular night vision, but also visual queues of tracked targets (and friendlies) on the ground.

1. What combat aircraft do we have with built in FLIR?? AC-130? B-2?? I'm sure they could strap one on its wing like all the others...but what is your point??

2. We know this.

3. It has no LGB capability, but I would say a supersonic JDAM strike from 24 miles out...direct hit...definitely constitutes a precision attack capability.

4. We know this.

5. We know this.

6. I'm more than sure we can find targets for either of those two A2G munitions.

7. If you really believe they're just going to throw a new weapon on it simply because it can talk to it you are dreaming. Still would take years of flight test.

8. I guess in fantasy land the F-35 will also carry enough munitions to attack ALL 16 tracked ground targets at the same time too.....

9. I'm sure the HMD will be awesome when they can actually make it all work Wink

Forum: General F-35 Forum

F-35 stealth?