You know, Norway can buy the F-35 and mount Meteors on it, and still have the better (or same) air defense aircraft. Even if technology increases the detection of the F-35 to something like 90km, the F-35 will still have the advantage. Especially when operating with an AWACS or a designated radar-director bird.

Remember, an F-35 with Meteors or AIM-120Ds on its wings will still be stealthier than a Typhoon with a similar loadout. Even in terms of performance, the F-35 can mount AIM-9X and/or possibly IRST-HOBS.

This way you get a stealth striker that can adeqautely fill the air-defense-intercept, attack role. Basically more than what you would get with the Tiffy.

Lastly, whats this buisiness that the F-35 cannot attack from standoff ranges? Cant it carry Storm Shadow and JASSM?

No-one has said for certain Meteor is going to be cleared on the F-35, we also know according to MBDA, it will not fit in the F-35B's weapons bay as its physically too long for it and have stated it requires a major redesign for this! It was already redesigned once (a number of fins removed) so that it would fit in the F-35A's bay.


Storm Shadow is being cleared but for external only.

Current non-US weapons being cleared:

ASRAAM - External/Internal
Brimstone - Internal
Storm Shadow - External.

Andy

they might be capable of being loaded... however it is down to the DoD (not the MoD) which weapons are cleared for use on the F-35, I am hearing that Brimstone might not now be cleared as the DoD thinks it will cost too much; but thats yet to be confirmed.

I don't think it would have a greater RCS but an EQUAL RCS to Typhoon as the more missiles externally... the larger the RCS.

I think what people (NOT MYSELF I must point out) think is what is the point of having a stealthy package if you can attack from stand-off range with expensive weapons. Why not just use dumb bombs?

Don't worry about what is cleared now, or will be. The F-16 today is carrying weapons its designers never imagined it to be carrying. So the same can be said for the F-35.

Slapping Meteors on the external pylons seems trivial enough, especially if it uses the same launcher as the AMRAAM. Without a doubt, it will be done. If not by the DoD, then the British or other European nations.


While yes, the more external ordinance you add, the greater the RCS, the F-35 will still be stealthier. Why? Because with a clean config (using only internal loads), its already stealthier than the Tiffy in its clean config. So its only natural to assume, that if both had an equal loadout of missiles on their wings, the F-35 would still have the lower RCS.


Those people just choose to remain ignorant. The point is: the F-35 can perform both the standoff roles, AND the stealthy penetration roles.

Whereas the Typhoon is limited to attacking targets from far away and still is under threat from local AA.

With the F-35, there are just more options overall. Hence why its going to end up being the better buy.

While yes, the more external ordinance you add, the greater the RCS, the F-35 will still be stealthier. Why? Because with a clean config (using only internal loads), its already stealthier than the Tiffy. So its only natural to assume, that if both had an equal loadout of missiles on their wings, the F-35 would still have the lower RCS.

Secondly, I do not think the comment re-Meteor fitting in the F-35 internal bay is correct. MBDA announced some time ago that it was going to make Meteor design changes so that it would fit and could be integrated if someone wanted to pony up the money. That announcement I think preceeded the decision to go back to the orginal smaller bay on the STOVL F-35B to save weight. I do not know if that meant the Meteor could no longer be carried on that one version. I'm not aware of any MBDA statements conforming or denying that particular point. In any case that would still leave the F-35A & C as being potential Meteor carriers.

Lastly: what F-22 external tanks? I'm not a raptor watcher so I may have my head where the sun doesn't shine but I do not remember ever seeing an F-22 with external tanks.

However, it will still vastly increase the range an aircraft can detect it at though.. possibly outside the range or the Aim-120D but possibly not that of the Meteor. And if not a fighter radar, more than likely an AWACs with its much more powerful radar.

It remains to be seen how stealthy external stores will be.

I know of one operational "stealth" pylon (the triple launcher for Brimstone) however it is only stealthy once all weapons have been released, while its carrying weapons; as you can imagine.....

Although it may employ the method the F-22 uses when jettisoning external tanks... the entire pylon goes with it. However in a war situation I could see that being a nuisance in resources and cost.

That said if you want an A2A fighter I still think Typhoon is a better choice. With a load of a max load of 6 external missiles (which I doubt, as external tanks are probably being carried) plus a max of four internal (if carrying ASRAAM) an F-35s stealth is effectively "compromised" regardless if it still has a little lower RCS. In a compromised situation I would rather have a very heavy weapon load.

Andy

-Only advantage F-35 really has is radar stealth, although technology to counter this is in development.
-Except for radar stealth, all other technology is the same generation as Typhoon.
-If you want to bomb baghdad, buy F-35, if you want to defend your countries airspace and attack baghdad at stand-off range, buy Typhoon.