Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

[/quote]The F-22 is superior in A2A, and on this we're in agreement. The Raptor is stealthier than the F-35, and we're also in agreement here. Your arguments fall apart immediately after these claims though. The F-35 is stealthier than anything else out there, and more agile than any of the aircraft that it's replacing. The A-10 and F-15E are not more survivable, as survivability isn't based merely on how many times one can be shot. It's based upon not being seen, in order to not get shot in the first place. The 30mm gun is the only real advantage that the A-10 has, and it's an irrelevant advantage at that. Strafing is but one method of providing CAS, and not really the preferred one. The F-35 has far greater situational awareness, and greater ability to use PGMs outside of the range of AAA/MANPADs. As for the F-35's prowess as a fighter, being second only to the F-22 hardly qualifies as being mediocre.[/quote]

Ok, the F-35 is more surivable in the aspect of SAMs and other radar equipment, but at one point, stealth will not matter. Making bombing runs at a low altitude, flak is gonna try to light you up stealth or not. BTW if Im saying illogical things about the F-35 it is because l simply do not like it, and would never want to fly it. This ofcourse upsets my dream of being a fighter pilot as Im damn sure thats what I would be stuck in by the time I go for it.

F-16.net Sponsor

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:

Other releases on the CatBird event state that the JSF hardware detected and jammed the F-22 radar.

If that's true then so much for LPI AESA radars not being detectable - although being both built by Northrop Grumman (AN/APG-77/81) I suppose its understandable how they can both probably detect each other.

shabah_cactus wrote:

Ok, the F-35 is more surivable in the aspect of SAMs and other radar equipment, but at one point, stealth will not matter. Making bombing runs at a low altitude, flak is gonna try to light you up stealth or not. .

I'm not sure you will be practising too many low level bombing runs - these days you can stay out of harms way and still be accurate in most cases it seems.

And of course how young are you - hopefully your career will end before lasers come into fashion!

Perhaps one problem is our definition of terms. Dropping a smart bomb from 20,000+ can be considered close air support (CAS) but this does not include every single CAS mission requirement. In any case if the mission is dropping a smart bomb from 20,000+ feet you often do not need an expensive strike fighter to do that and a far cheaper UCAS with far greater loiter time will be more cost effective.

Sure the F-35 can do CAS. The question is whether that's the aircraft for the mission? It's also relevant that there are times when an aircraft does have to go low and slow to positively identify a target and/or perhaps engage with guns. A fast mover is not always going to be the best choice for CAS. Bigger, faster, and more expensive is not always better.

Another issue is only having single seat F-35's for forward air control. Sometimes the guys on the ground can't identify the target and someone is required to drop below the cloud level and positively identify the target. The requirement to go low and slow for FAC and/or CAS is not something we can yet totally eliminate.

shabah_cactus wrote:

Ok, the F-35 is more surivable in the aspect of SAMs and other radar equipment, but at one point, stealth will not matter. Making bombing runs at a low altitude, flak is gonna try to light you up stealth or not. BTW if Im saying illogical things about the F-35 it is because l simply do not like it, and would never want to fly it. This ofcourse upsets my dream of being a fighter pilot as Im damn sure thats what I would be stuck in by the time I go for it.

The problem with the assumptions you're making, is that you think the F-35 will be operated in the same manner as its predecessors. You're ignoring the fact that with all the new capabilities it brings, new tactics will also be employed(just like new tactics have been developed for the F-22 in A2A).
With EOTS/EODAS along with the ability to use third party imagery for targetting, the F-35 pilot will be far less reliant on the MK 1 eyeball. As a result, it will be able to stay out of the range of the flak/MANPADS, rather than relying on armor to survive multiple hits.

lb wrote:

Perhaps one problem is our definition of terms. Dropping a smart bomb from 20,000+ can be considered close air support (CAS) but this does not include every single CAS mission requirement. In any case if the mission is dropping a smart bomb from 20,000+ feet you often do not need an expensive strike fighter to do that and a far cheaper UCAS with far greater loiter time will be more cost effective.

Sure the F-35 can do CAS. The question is whether that's the aircraft for the mission? It's also relevant that there are times when an aircraft does have to go low and slow to positively identify a target and/or perhaps engage with guns. A fast mover is not always going to be the best choice for CAS. Bigger, faster, and more expensive is not always better.

Another issue is only having single seat F-35's for forward air control. Sometimes the guys on the ground can't identify the target and someone is required to drop below the cloud level and positively identify the target. The requirement to go low and slow for FAC and/or CAS is not something we can yet totally eliminate.

The EOTS/EODAS will give the ability to ID targets at stand off ranges, and with NCW, the F-35 will be able to get imagery from other aircraft/UAVs that have a better vantage point. They can also send/receive imagery to/from ground forces.

lb wrote:

Perhaps one problem is our definition of terms. Dropping a smart bomb from 20,000+ can be considered close air support (CAS) but this does not include every single CAS mission requirement. In any case if the mission is dropping a smart bomb from 20,000+ feet you often do not need an expensive strike fighter to do that and a far cheaper UCAS with far greater loiter time will be more cost effective.

Sure the F-35 can do CAS. The question is whether that's the aircraft for the mission? It's also relevant that there are times when an aircraft does have to go low and slow to positively identify a target and/or perhaps engage with guns. A fast mover is not always going to be the best choice for CAS. Bigger, faster, and more expensive is not always better.

Another issue is only having single seat F-35's for forward air control. Sometimes the guys on the ground can't identify the target and someone is required to drop below the cloud level and positively identify the target. The requirement to go low and slow for FAC and/or CAS is not something we can yet totally eliminate.

It's never bad to be able to do something and the days of dedicated aircraft for every role are over. Though I agree that there might be better suited as well as more cost effective platforms than the F-35, it will perform well in this mission due its sophisticated avionics, sensors and weapons. Advanced sensors are in many ways more effective than the MK1 eyeball and dropping below the cloud base is certainly no issue for any fighter/striker if needed so it is a somewhat moot point. Are you aware that the OA-10 is a single seater as well? A second pair of eyes and hands can be useful, not doubt but FAC obviously worked well on single seaters as well and with the increasing automation and vastly improved sensor performance things have become much easier.

What could an A-10 do with a system like the EODAS on the F-35? It certainly wouldn't hurt its ability to do CAS.

flighthawk wrote:

I'm not sure you will be practising too many low level bombing runs - these days you can stay out of harms way and still be accurate in most cases it seems.

And of course how young are you - hopefully your career will end before lasers come into fashion!

15 years young...who knows what will be around IF (a very big IF) I have the appitude to follow the dream. Laughing

shabah_cactus wrote:

flighthawk wrote:

I'm not sure you will be practising too many low level bombing runs - these days you can stay out of harms way and still be accurate in most cases it seems.

And of course how young are you - hopefully your career will end before lasers come into fashion!

15 years young...who knows what will be around IF (a very big IF) I have the appitude to follow the dream. Laughing

Maybe you'll get to fly that composite Skyraider you always wanted.

That was badankadonk or whatever. Bronzitonic maybe?

@1st503rdsgt Nope, my "dream plane" (corny I know) would be the solid ol' Phantom II. Huge engines, slanted elevators, thick black exaust, it's one mean jet!

Back on topic, It appears the F-22 could use some of the F-35's tech for future upgrades, if thats possible. The two seem very compatable at sight, but Im no avionics guru.

It appears that the F-35 will be good enough for the next decade or so after it enters service, but we may live to regret not having a greater number of dedicated A2A platforms like the F-22 after that. We'll just have to see.

Quote:

If that's true then so much for LPI AESA radars not being detectable - although being both built by Northrop Grumman (AN/APG-77/81) I suppose its understandable how they can both probably detect each other.

Who said that LPI radars are not detectable? Are VLO aircrafts undetectable?

flighthawk wrote:

If that's true then so much for LPI AESA radars not being detectable

You do know that LPI means Low Probability of Intercept, right?

It's just like the Low in Very Low Observable (VLO). While anything that emits will eventually be detected, it will allow a first look advantage most of the time.

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 Raptor vs F-35 Joint Strike Fighter