Two different classes of aircraft...IMO pointless to compare them. They are both capable aircraft.

Okay, well then ask the question when a production representative airframe is flying. Any numbers for the F-35 right now are just guesses.

Nah, just about everything listed is pretty much set in stone with the exception of final weight. Even this is not expected to be more than 5% off one way or the other. At +5% the F-35A will be 13.3~13.4 tons. It'll be as if the weight reducing redesign never happened, and the AA-1 airframe is carried forward. At -5% it'll be 12 tons -- the original, unrealistically optimistic, target weight as listed in the 2004 specification disclosure.

Remember, we are not talking about how fast it'll prove capable of maxing out, whether it'll supercruise, how high it'll be cleared to fly or for how many miles under what mission profiles. That we'll have to await for sneak peaks later in the flight testing drama. But what engine, how big a wing, how big a radar, fuel load, etc is practically solid info at this point.

The last slides reach crack smoking levels claiming double digit SAM prowess in a stiff IADS when other USAF people say that ain't so.

Other people such as who? There are people who says Plasma Stealth is the way to go too, or that L-band AWACs defeats stealth. You can believe them, thats fine. But have you ever considered the fact that they MAY be full of it?

The fact is that S-300/400 batteries cannot shoot at things they cannot detect and/or track. With their radar range reduced from roughly 400km to 50km, an air defense network built around them becomes as leaky as the US-Mexican border. They can be flown around and/or engaged beyond their engagement range regardless of whether the aircraft has thrust vectoring or cruises at Mach 1.7.

What the F-22 does which the F-35 does not is make it more economical to fly the engagement against a double digit SAM at Mach 1.5~Mach 2 by not requiring the use of burners to maintain those speed. Flying at Mach 1.7 then accelerating Mach 2+ if needed reduces the kinematic range of the S-400 battery from by about 20~25% vs flying at Mach 1.2 and accelerating to Mach 1.7~1.8 if needed. Remember, there is still a huge difference between a Mach 5 SAM and a the aircraft in either case. That is the kinematic difference. The other difference is that the F-22 is slightly stealthier than the F-35. By an estimate of 0.0004 vs 0.0014 sq-m in RCS you may be looking at a detection range difference of say 42km vs 50km. Notable? Yes. But not exactly game changing. That is to say none of these advantages causes the picture in a manner such that one aircraft works while the other doesn't. But with the F-22 you lose the ability to carry stores like the JSOW or other 3.7~4.2 m or 2000 lbs class ordnance -- including future high performance anti-radiation missiles which may be larger more like a Standard and an AMRAAM in size.

However, going F-35 will give you three times as many airframes to fight with. That is much more significant than any of the above.

detection range difference of say 42km vs 50km

3 times the airframes... hmmm well ......

Here is some more good reading:
"Even without stealth, this is the world's best fighter," General Lewis said. "The F-22, its ability with speed and maneuverability, is unprecedented. The problem with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter in establishing air dominance is that you have to buy two or three to replace the F-22, because it only has half the weapons load, and it doesn't have the speed. You can't replace (the F-22) one-for-one with an F-35 or any other legacy fighter such as the F-15E."

Maj. Gen. Richard B.H. Lewis, Air Force executive officer for the F-22 program

F-22 Excels At Establishing Air Dominance
http://www.f-16.net/news_article2293.html


--------------

"The JSF is not a substitute for
the F/A-22A. In fact, the JSF will rely on the F/A-
22A for air dominance. The F/A-22A offers the
aerodynamic performance and manoeuvrability
required to counter advanced ‘double-digit’ SAMs
[Surface-to-Air-Missiles developed in the Soviet
Union during the 1980s and later by Russia with
NATO reporting names higher than SA-10] and
next generation air threats that are growing
throughout the Pacific Theatre of operations. The
F-35A JSF is a low cost, multi-mission aircraft
primarily designed for air-to-ground operations to
replace Air Force F-16s and A-10s. "

That is quote from an interview of General Deptula,(USAF) in publication: Defence Today






Doubtful the comparison is that easy. Even more of a concern with the export model which there is no word of what stealth ability will be approved by a LOEXCOM workgroup.

The stealth on the F-35 has a goal of being low maintenance and low cost. That doesn't mean it is something you want to send after double digit SAMs. And in the case of a naked stealth event for either F-22 has power and speed to act.

Super cruise at 60k with F-22 also means it will toss an AMRAAM a heck of a lot longer. Loaded up with weapons internal it has 4 A2A missiles vs. JSF's 2. Radar range on the F-22 should be much longer also.

We are gutting our air force more and more everyday to pay for a lot of stuff like this. The best thing that could happen to the USAF is for JSF to die before anything more stupid gets cut from the USAF. JSF is not worth killing E-10, underfunding C-5 upgrades, cutting flying hours accross the board by 7%, goofing up B-52 SOJ, killing off CLSS squadrons, and any number of other dumb acts. Navy already can't afford JSF with shipbuilding going nuts and all services losing funds to a war with no end. JSF is not in any way worth breaking the USAF over. Keep F-22 in production, and keep F-16s on a low rate production as needed. Any airframe money for R&D that comes up should go to a new long range bomber and FB-22 respectively. For the last 40 years we have being losing more and more foreign bases. Building yet more short range aircraft of the expense of JSF is a fools errand which doesn't match up to our needs. USAF needs to be funded well. This is now, not happening. Anything that gets in the way of this happening needs to be cancelled out right. Especially if it doesn't give USAF any special war wining advantage. Give me F-22, B-2 and an IADS will be beat down enough where legacys can get out the pooper scooper and clean up. The U.S. Navy can throw JSF into the A-12 dumpster and we can go on and fund J-UCAS-D for the big deck carrier.

Doubtful the comparison is that easy. Even more of a concern with the export model which there is no word of what stealth ability will be approved by a LOEXCOM workgroup.

The stealth on the F-35 has a goal of being low maintenance and low cost. That doesn't mean it is something you want to send after double digit SAMs. And in the case of a naked stealth event for either F-22 has power and speed to act.

Super cruise at 60k with F-22 also means it will toss an AMRAAM a heck of a lot longer. Loaded up with weapons internal it has 4 A2A missiles vs. JSF's 2. Radar range on the F-22 should be much longer also.

We are gutting our air force more and more everyday to pay for a lot of stuff like this...

No offense meant, but you haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about. You can't even get such elemental figures as AA missile loads for the F-22 and F-35 right.


2 internal F-35 for sure. 2 external, 4-6 internal at a later date assuming that gets setup with Block III software and a bunch of other things that have to be done first that will take priority.



And what is "gutting" the USAF is not the F-35. That culprit's name is Iraq.

Interesting here is that, I only see the USAF first hand just about everyday. Iraq is in fact a big part of that, but so is JSF. The war funding can't be controlled much by USAF. However having gold plated tastes for the F-35 when there are other ways to recapitalize the fleet is irresponsible. In fact Mosley should come right out and say JSF can't be paid for at this time. Then watch the bought and paid for congress (those that belong to LM) pony up the extra funds for JSF. There are tons of other war winning things that make the USAF run that are being hurt now. Killing off JSF, ( kill the body bag maker called V-22 also ) should be easy choices.