Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

APA is absolutely ridiculous for F-22 and F-35 analysis, and useful only for providing Russian industry CLAIMS. Their comparative estimates are incredibly biased.

F-16.net Sponsor

battleshipagincourt wrote:

Yes I'm sure you're laughing, considering as there's really nothing of substance within your latest response.

I know, but the same applies to you.

battleshipagincourt wrote:

Some time doing a google search or visiting wikipedia can offer some very reasonable estimates on certain details not openly available to the public. Guestimates aren't cold-hard facts, but they're a lot more reliable than very unrealistic guesses.

Wikipedia?! Someone must be really clueless to use wikipedia as a source for 'military knowledge'.
And I thought that (for example) real aircraft manuals describing aircrafts and weapon systems are better source of information. Stupid me. From now on I'll stick to wikipedia and APA. Wink

Except I'm not the one making the extraordinary statement... you are.

battleshipagincourt wrote:

Except I'm not the one making the extraordinary statement... you are.

Oh really? Let's see...

Quote:

Better than the APG-77? In terms of performance, no.

Quote:

http://www.ausairpower.net/0830-ASPI-Rebuttal-HR.pdf

Quote:

For air to air capabilities, there is no question that the APG-77 is significantly better at detecting LO targets at longer ranges than what the F-35 packs.

Quote:

It's just that an F-22 (with a more powerful radar and lower RCS than most fighters) supposedly could detect an F-35-sized target from ranges of about 20 nautical miles, whereas the latter would have to close within 9 nautical miles to detect an F-22/B-2 sized-target... almost within visual range.

Likewise one F-22 could detect another at about 12 miles, and an F-35 could detect another F-35 at 15 miles.

You know nothing about the real performance of the APG-77 and 81 and yet you present here your speculations like if they were facts.
What made me laugh is that you use APA as a source...

battleshipagincourt wrote:

exec wrote:

Obviously - you still don't get it. Laughing

Yes I'm sure you're laughing, considering as there's really nothing of substance within your latest response.

Some time doing a google search or visiting wikipedia can offer some very reasonable estimates on certain details not openly available to the public. Guestimates aren't cold-hard facts, but they're a lot more reliable than very unrealistic guesses.

It depends on who's doing the guesstimating, to whether they're more reliable than very unrealistic guesses. Wikipedia's main usefulness is in providing places to look(I.e. the cited sources), when starting research.

Exec... You really don't get it. Why the hell are you posting here? What do you really know? What does the public really know?

Even the experts on this site who aren't authorized to reveal sensitive details can't say what isn't open for them to reveal. This is all speculative, yet you're treating one company's claim exactly under the same matter, except that the reasoning is devoid of logic.

Lockheed Martin has no incentive to downsize its F-35 for any reason... that's the product they're hoping to sell to the US and international markets. The F-22 on the other hand had already been through the entire R&D process, which leaves very little profitability left in that fighter. And since the F-22 isn't available to the international market, it's always in their best interest to paint that F-35 in as rosy a picture as possible.

And the F-22 was built with air superiority in mind, whereas the F-35 was intended for strike with air superiority only being secondary. It would make absolutely no sense for them to try and build something that would surpass its air superiority counterpart's radar capabilities, in active or passive mode.

battleshipagincourt wrote:

Exec... You really don't get it. Why the hell are you posting here? What do you really know? What does the public really know?

Ok, I admit - it was all about APA as your source of information. This is not a good source.

battleshipagincourt wrote:

whereas the F-35 was intended for strike with air superiority only being secondary.

Do you know that you could say exactly the same about the F-16?

battleshipagincourt wrote:

It would make absolutely no sense for them to try and build something that would surpass its air superiority counterpart's radar capabilities, in active or passive mode.

This doesn't make sense.

Seeing how all the systems on the production F35 are going to be at least 10 years newer than the F22, I can imagine a situation where the F35 would have some advantage over the F22 in A2A combat. I have no idea what that advantage would be (probably not kinematic) but the day will come when F22s and F35s will train together. I doubt the F22 will achieve the same kill ratio against the F35 as it did over legacy fighters.
I hope the USAF is seriously thinking about some kind of block type upgrades to the F22 in the near future. Starting with the F35s sensors would be interesting. I remember LMT proposed this a few months ago.

Well, an old topic brought back to life. Unfortunately it's one of those "vs" topics and guess what...the "prove it / how do you know" type bickering has been spooling up since about the last couple of pages or so. Just like I said how these "vs" topics ends up the last time.

I, or another moderator may (and I stress may) decide to re-open this topic at a later date to allow some people to rethink what a good / helpful contribution is to the F-22 Raptor Forum. But since nothing good is coming out of this topic lately, it's closed.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 Raptor vs F-35 Joint Strike Fighter